THE IMPACT OF MINORITY FAITH ON THE EXPERIENCE
OF MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES:
THE PERSPECTIVES OF DEVOTEES OF EARTH RELIGIONS
PROFESSIONAL DISSERTATION
SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY
OF
THE SCHOOL OF PROEFSSIONAL PSYCHOLOGY
WRIGHT STATE UNIVERSITY
BY
ALISON NIBLICK, PsyM
IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE
REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE
OF
DOCTOR OF PSYCHOLOGY
Dayton, OH
COMMITTEE CHAIR: Julie L. Williams, PsyD, ABPP
Committee Member: James E. Dobbins, PhD, ABPP
Committee Member: Eve M. Wolf, PhD, ABPP
September, 2013
WRIGHT STATE UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF PROFESSIONAL PSYCHOLOGY
July 13, 2012
I HEREBY RECOMMEND THAT THE DISSERTATION PREPARED UNDER MY
SUPERVISION BY ALISON NIBLICK ENTITLED THE IMPACT OF MINORITY
FAITH ON THE EXPERIENCE OF MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES: THE
PERSPECTIVES OF DEVOTEES OF EARTH RELIGION BE ACCEPTED IN
PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
DOCTOR OF PSYCHOLOGY.
_______________________________________
Julie L. Williams, PsyD, ABPP
Dissertation Director
_______________________________________
La Pearl Logan Winfrey, PhD
Associate Dean
Abstract
In response to an identified need in the psychological literature for research on minority
religion, especially earth-centered religion, this dissertation was developed to 1) present
an overview of the three main branches of contemporary earth religion, 2) illuminate the
realities of minority religious identity in the United States of America, 3) collect data
regarding the demographic and identity variables of devotees of earth centered religion,
and 4) solicit feedback from the earth religious community regarding its understanding of
psychological distress, preferred ways of coping with distress, and perceptions and
experiences of professional mental health services. A total of 64 self-identified devotees
of earth-centered faith completed an online questionnaire about their identity variables,
experiences of psychological distress, ways of understanding distress, and experiences,
perceptions, and fears pertaining to mental health services. The questionnaire was
developed by the researcher based upon a literature review and consultation of the
National Council of Schools and Programs of Professional Psychology’s developmental
achievement levels in diversity. Descriptive and statistical findings pertaining to this
religious population are detailed. Additionally, clinical and research implications of the
results, as well as limitations and strengths of the current study are identified and
discussed.
iii
Table of Contents
Aim and Purpose
5
Literature Review
9
Basic Tenets of Earth Religion
9
Shared Impact of Social Location
12
Differences in Social Location Among Earth Religions
26
Yoruban and Dahomey Traditional African Religions
27
Native American Spirituality
35
European and American Paganism
44
Methods
53
Results
55
Discussion
94
Appendix A: Questionnaire
103
Appendix B: Figures
110
References
123
iv
List of Tables
Table 1. Frequency and Percentage of Respondents from Each Type of Earth Centered
Faith
56
Table 2. Frequency and Percentage of Respondents from Researcher-Identified
Categories of Earth Centered Faith
57
Table 3. Frequency and Percentage of Respondent Sects of European/American
Paganism
58
Table 4. Frequency and Percentage of Respondent Sects of Yoruban African Diaspora
Religion
59
Table 5. Frequency and Percentage of Respondent Santería/Lucumi/Ifa Religious Paths
59
Table 6. Frequency and Percentage of Respondent Candombleizero/Umbandan Religious
Paths
59
Table 7. Frequency and Percentage of Respondent Dahomey African Diaspora (Vodou)
Religious Paths
60
Table 8. Frequency and Percentage of Respondent Aboriginal and Native American
Religious Paths
60
Table 9. Frequency and Percentage of Respondent Other Earth and Nature Religious
Paths
61
Table 10. Frequency and Percentage of Respondent Gender Identity
61
Table 11. Frequency and Percentage of Respondents with White Heritage
62
Table 12. Frequency and Percentage of White, Biracial, Multiracial, and Latino
Respondents’ Ancestral White/European Heritage
v
63
Table 13. Frequency and Percentage of Respondents with Black/African Heritage
64
Table 14. Frequency and Percentage of Black/African/African-American Respondents’
Ancestral Black/African Heritage
64
Table 15. Frequency and Percentage of Respondents with Aboriginal/Native American
Heritage
65
Table 16. Frequency and Percentage of Aboriginal/Native American Respondents’
Ancestral Aboriginal/Native American Heritage
65
Table 17. Frequency and Percentage of Respondents with Latino Heritage
66
Table 18. Frequency and Percentage of Latino Respondents’ Ancestral Latino Heritage
66
Table 19. Frequency and Percentage of Biracial and Multiracial Respondents
67
Table 20. Frequency and Percentage of Biracial and Multiracial Respondents Ancestral
Heritage
67
Table 21. Frequency and Percentage of European/American Pagans’ Racial/Ethnic
Identity
68
Table 22. Frequency and Percentage of African Diaspora Faith Devotees’ Racial/Ethnic
Identity
68
Table 23. Frequency and Percentage of Traditional Native American Spirituality
Devotees’ Racial/Ethnic Identity
69
Table 24. Frequency and Percentage of Other Earth/Nature Religion Devotees’
Racial/Ethnic Identity
69
Table 25. Frequency and Percentage of Respondent Socioeconomic Status
70
Table 26. Frequency and Percentage of Respondent Disability Status
70
vi
Table 27. Frequency and Percentage of Disability Types
71
Table 28. Frequency and Percentage of Respondent Sexual Orientation
71
Table 29. Frequency and Percentage of Respondent Inherited Religiosity: Basic
72
Table 30. Frequency and Percentage of Respondent Inherited Religiosity: Detailed
73
Table 31. Frequency and Percentage of the Salience of Spirituality to Respondent Identity
74
Table 32. Frequency and Percentage of the Salience of Race/Ethnicity to Respondent
Identity
75
Table 33. Frequency and Ranking of Respondents’ Attributions of Distress
78
Table 34. Frequency and Ranking of Respondents’ Preferred Methods for Coping with
Distress
81
Table 35. Frequency and Percentage of Availability of Mental Health Services to
Respondents
82
Table 36. Frequency and Percentage of Respondent Willingness to Seek Mental Health
Services
83
Table 37. Frequency and Ranking of Reasons Why Respondents Would Not Seek Mental
Health Services
83
Table 38. Frequency and Percentage of Respondents Who Believed Mental Health
Services Could Help Them Personally
84
Table 39. Frequency and Percentage of Respondents Who Believed Mental Health
Services Could Help Others of the Same Faith
85
Table 40. Frequency and Percentage of Respondents Who Feared Religious
Discrimination When Considering Seeking Mental Health Services
vii
86
Table 41. Frequency and Percentage of Respondents Who Did Not Seek Mental Health
Services Due to Fear of Religious Discrimination
87
Table 42. Frequency and Percentage of Respondents Who Experienced Religious
Discrimination When Seeking Mental Health Services
88
Table 43. Frequency and Percentage of Respondents Who Disclosed Their Spirituality
When Seeking Mental Health Services
89
Table 44. Frequency and Percentage of Mental Health Providers’ Comprehension of
Respondents’ Spirituality
90
Table 45. Frequency and Percentage of Respondents Who Were Proselytized to by a
Mental Health Provider, or Whose Mental Health Provider Tried to Convert Them
to Another Faith
92
Table 46. Frequency and Percentage of Respondents Whose Mental Health Provider
Displayed Religious Symbols, Images, or Phrases
92
Table 47. Frequency and Percentage of Respondent Comfort Level with Mental Health
Providers’ Display of Religious Symbols, Images, or Phrases
viii
93
The Impact of Minority Faith on the Experience of Mental Health Services:
The Perspectives of Devotees of Earth Religions
Earth-centered religions are minority faiths due to both their lack of acceptance by
majority culture and by their small number of practitioners. However, they are a
significant minority, as research suggests that 6% of the world practices some form of
Paganism or earth- centered religion (York, 2003). For the purpose of this paper,
Paganism and similar earth-centered religious practices are defined as the “belief in a
plurality of male and female gods, [the] efficacy of magic and ritual, the body and nature
as mediums of sacred power, and a shared universe in which gods and humans are
mutually interdependent” (York, 2003). Due to their minority status, many practitioners
of earth- centered religions tend to be cautious when sharing their religious views with
others, especially those in positions of power or authority (Yardley, 2008). Moreover,
many devotees of earth religions have some fear or uneasiness regarding the possibility
of political and/or legal persecution. Study of the age during which those accused of
witchcraft were tortured and burned at the stake or executed by other means in the name
of Christianity led a prominent author in the field of Pagan studies to wonder if "The
Burning Times" might return (Barner-Barry, 2005).
Practitioners of European-based earth religions also know that the names they call
themselves, such as Pagan, Witch, Wiccan, or Druid, might be considered eccentric at
best, or threatening to others at worst. Similarly, practitioners of Native American
spirituality and African diaspora faiths also know that their faith and the labels associated
1
with their faith might be considered eccentric at best, or dangerous and threatening to
others at worst. Individuals in these religious groups fear for their own safety, or for the
safety of their family or fellow devotees of earth religions. Subsequently, many devotees
choose to keep their religious beliefs secret—a practice that has been nicknamed staying
or being in “the broom closet”. In contrast, others may be open about their beliefs in
some situations, but secretive in others (Barner-Barry, 2005). When children are
involved, earth religious parents may be extra-vigilant, as some have suffered religious
discrimination at the hands of the American legal system, and subsequently, have lost
custody of their children, or had them temporarily removed from their homes (Cookson,
1997). In most cases, misrepresentations of the parents’ religious practices were used to
justify suspension of their custodial rights.
Some may wonder how the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United
States, which asserts that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of
religion, or prohibiting the free exercise of religion (U.S. Constitution) factors into this
seeming infringement upon freedom of religion. At the time when the Constitution was
written, most United States inhabitants considered citizens practiced Protestant
Christianity, therefore, the United States was considered a predominantly Christian
country. Neither Native Americans nor enslaved Africans were considered citizens of the
United States at the time, subsequently, their religious practices were not protected by the
Constitution. The Establishment Clause, cited above, was intended to keep one Christian
sect from gaining the exclusive support of the government (Barner-Barry, 2005).
Until recent decades, Christianity has been the normative religion of the United
States and the United States government. In fact, one might even venture to say that it has
2
been the established religion of the United States. Subsequently, a belief in the ChristianJudeo God and adherence to Christian religious practices has become conflated with
American identity and citizenship. This is especially troublesome, as current immigration
patterns and the religious malleability of many contemporary United States citizens
suggest that the United States may not remain a predominantly Christian nation in
population-terms (Barner-Barry, 2005).
There is a significant dearth of peer-reviewed literature available regarding earth
religions, and many helping professionals freely admit to having little to no familiarity
with the beliefs of earth- centered faiths. This dearth is of particular concern for
psychologists in Australia, Canada, some regions of the Caribbean such as Cuba, Haiti,
and Brazil, Europe, and the United States, just to name a few, as research suggests that
the number of practitioners of earth- centered religions in these countries is rapidly
growing. In fact, some researchers suggest that the number of practitioners of earthcentered religions doubles in size approximately every eighteen months (Robinson,
2009). Some attribute this unprecedented increase to the desire of individuals of African,
European, and Native American descent to honor and learn more about their ancestral
heritage. Additionally, the recent rise in practitioners of earth- centered spirituality has
also been attributed to the paternalism, sexism, homophobia, and insensitivity to the earth
which characterizes some of the conservative wings of popular organized religions
(Robinson, 2009). In order to better comprehend how the tenets and values of earthcentered religion may alter the approach of clinicians’ working with devotees of earth
religion, several forms of earth- centered spirituality, including Native American
3
religious traditions, Yoruban and Dahomey African diaspora faiths, and European and
American Paganism are explored.
4
Aim and Purpose
Most societies, American included, express a preference for cultural homogeneity
through racism, ethnocentrism, religious discrimination, and other principles of
exclusion. In a society as racially, ethnically, culturally, and religiously diverse as the
United States, difficulties are bound to arise when this desire for cultural homogeneity is
expressed (Green, 1999). These difficulties are especially concerning when members of
the majority culture are responsible for providing necessary services, such as mental
health services, to culturally heterogeneous individuals. Subsequently, proponents of
culturally competent psychological care assert that these services can and should be
provided to individuals in ways that are both culturally acceptable to them and that
enhance their sense of cultural group membership and power (Green, 1999).
Research suggests that minor daily stressors have direct effects on emotional and
physical functioning, and also accumulate over a series of time to create persistent
irritations, frustrations, and overloads that can result in more serious stress reactions such
as anxiety and depression (Lazarus, 1999; Zautra, 2003). Furthermore, research
conducted on dominant groups suggest that common forms of daily stress that can
crescendo into more significant psychological distress include interpersonal tensions,
representing arguments or avoided arguments (e.g., disagreement with a co-worker over
an issue at work); overloads, representing having too much to do and not enough time to
do it (e.g., unexpectedly having to babysit for a grandchild); and network events,
5
representing events where something happens to a close friend or relative that turns out to
be stressful for the individual (e.g., a family member is hospitalized) (Almeida, Stawski,
& Cichy, 2010). What is unclear, however, is if these common sources of daily stress that
can have long-term impacts on mental health and wellbeing are similar across cultural
and religious groups. In short, is our current understanding of daily stress and its
relationship with psychological distress culturally competent?
Cultural competence in the diversity domain of spirituality and religiosity is
especially important for mental health practitioners, as spirituality and religiosity have
been found to impact mental health and perceptions of distress in clinically and
statistically significant ways. Overall, clinical literature suggests that spirituality is a
major factor in promoting health and wellbeing (Reimer, 1999; Dana, 1993).
Additionally, research has also suggested that spirituality can be a protective factor
against suicide and alcoholism, especially among Native American populations (Stack,
1983; Moss, Edwards, Edwards, Janzen, & Howell, 1985). Also among Native
Americans, specifically the Inupiat, spirituality has been found to be a source of pride and
strength, and a helpful aid when coping with stressful situations (Reimer, 2002).
Research with undergraduate students suggests that common ways of coping with
stressful events include problem focused coping (e.g. coping by attempting to resolve the
stressor), wishful thinking (e.g. hoping a miracle will happen, wishing that the situation
would go away), and distancing or detachment (e.g. pretending as if nothing happened,
trying to forget the stressor) (Folkman & Lazarus, 1985). Other common methods of
coping identified by the researchers include seeking social support (e.g. talking to
someone), emphasizing the positive (e.g. looking for the “silver lining” in the situation),
6
self-blame (e.g. self-criticism or lecture), tension reduction (e.g. rest, meditation,
exercise, etc.), and self-isolation (e.g. avoiding others, keeping feelings to self) (Folkman
& Lazarus, 1985). Interestingly, the researchers in the above study included prayer within
the category of social support.
However, problems can arise when the values, worldviews, and constructs of
clinical psychology, including the constructs of stress and coping, are exported to and
transposed upon disempowered groups. Clinical psychology is heavily influenced by
“Western,” white, sexist, ableist, and heterosexist thought, thus, it may not adequately
capture the experience of individuals who are not “Western,” male, able-bodied,
heterosexual, or otherwise socio-politically privileged. Though the exportation and
transposition of Western psychological values and constructs is usually motivated by
beneficent intentions, it can result in the failure to recognize and accurately treat another
culture’s indigenous psychological distress, the misdiagnosis of something culturally
normative as “abnormal,” and even the spread of “Western” mental illnesses to cultures
where they were previously unknown (Watters, 2010). Moreover, the exportation of
psychological constructs is also antithetical to the concept of social justice, or providing
underserved populations with the opportunity to explain their own worldview, and what
they believe they need.
Thus, the purpose of this text is to understand the worldviews and values of
Native American, Yoruban and Dahomey African diaspora, and European/American
earth- centered religions through a review of existing literature. Specifically, attention
will be paid to aspects of religious worldview that are relevant to clinical psychology: for
example, perspectives on suffering, healing, and community and social roles. Then, a
7
survey was developed centered upon this understanding, and was used to gather
information regarding this population’s:
•
Perception of mental health services,
•
Ability to access mental health services
•
Beliefs about the acceptability of seeking services, and
•
Subjective experience of the impact of their faith upon their experience in
therapy.
Finally, data collected from survey was used to highlight:
•
This population’s indigenous and preferred methods of healing,
•
How mental health services can be shaped in a way that is therapeutically
meaningful for this population, and
•
How clinical psychology can strive towards cultural competence with this
population.
In the interest of transparency, accountability, and diversity competence in research, the
researcher collecting the above data and authoring this text identifies as a white Pagan
bisexual woman in her mid-20s who has multiple invisible disabilities, and was born and
raised in the United States of America in middle to lower-middle socioeconomic
households. Subsequently, this text is informed by these comprehensions of reality or
worldviews.
8
Literature Review
Basic Tenets of Earth Religion
For the purposes of this study, earth- centered spirituality is defined as the “belief
in a plurality of male and female gods, [the] efficacy of magic and ritual, the body and
nature as mediums of sacred power, and a shared universe in which gods and humans are
mutually interdependent” (York, 2003). Though numerous individual variations exist,
most earth religions have basic conceptualizations of divinity, ethics and values, and
religious rituals that share overarching similarities. For the purposes of this text, selfidentified practitioners of Paganism or Neopaganism are referred to as devotees of
European/American Paganism. Self-identified devotees of Candomblé or Umbanda as
well as self-identified devotees of Santería, Lucumi, and Ifa are referred to as devotees of
Yoruban African diaspora religion. Self-identified devotees of Vodou are referred to as
devotees of Dahomey African diaspora religion, while devotees of Native American and
aboriginal spirituality, as well as devotees of other earth religions are referred to in the
same manner as previously and as they identified themselves. This terminology is
intended to simplify and clarify the discussion of various types of earth-centered faith by
combining groups based upon geographic and cultural origin and similarity. Additionally,
these geographically and culturally similar groups of religions are similar enough to one
another to warrant combination through a broader descriptive term.
The two groups combined under the term Yoruban African diaspora religion
(Santería/Lucumi, Ifa, and Candomblé) differ primarily in terms of language of devotees
9
(Spanish v. Portuguese), as well as geographical region of primary practice (Cuba, Puerto
Rico, Florida, and some other US states v. Brazil). Similarly, self-identified practitioners
of (Neo)Paganism warrant the term of devotees of European and European-American
Paganism due to the common European cultural and linguistic influence in the religion,
as well as the current geographic concentration of (Neo)Pagans in Europe and the United
States.
Conceptualization of divinity. Earth- centered religions generally conceptualize
the divine in both feminine and masculine terms, and consider both divine and human
feminine characteristics and principles to be at least as important as masculine
characteristics and principles. Practitioners of earth- centered spiritualities differ from
followers of more mainstream religions in that they usually conceptualize divinity in a
polytheistic (belief in many deities) rather than monotheistic (belief in one deity) manner.
Subsequently, even when majority culture attempts to discuss earth- centered spirituality
in general terms, its use of the term “God” is a specific, denominational reference. “God”,
in the commonly understood sense, is a personal, male deity—worshipped by
monotheistic faiths such as Judaism, Islam, and Christianity (Yardley, 2008). Therefore,
“nondenominational”, nonspecific discussions of religion between devotees of earth
religion and members of majority culture can elicit feelings of exclusion and
marginalization for Pagans and other practitioners of earth- centered religions. Finally,
practitioners of earth- centered religions have no supernatural being in their pantheon of
deities who resembles the devil or Satan figure found in Christianity and Islam
(Robinson, 2009).
10
Many devotees of earth religion also conceptualize the divine immediately and
primarily as the earth. This deification of the earth means that all living and nonliving
parts of the earth are sacred (Barner-Barry, 2005). In most earth-centered traditions, the
divine is not transcendent, as God is in the Christian tradition. Rather, divinity is
immanent equally in a person, a bird, a tree, a stream, or a stone. Subsequently, humans,
other animals, plants, and all earth components usually thought of as nonliving are
understood as sacred in the earth religious worldview (Barner-Barry, 2005).
Reverence for the earth and life. Unsurprisingly, earth- centered religions place
a strong emphasis upon preservation of and reverence for the environment. In most earthcentered spiritual worldviews, all living things (including humans, animals, plants, rocks,
stars, and planets) are considered sacred, and may also be regarded as having a spirit.
Many practitioners of these faiths honor the passage of the seasons, and may view the
solstices, equinoxes, full and new moons as holy days. Devotees of earth- centered
spiritualities usually attempt to meet and hold religious rites out of doors whenever
possible. Overall, practitioners of earth- centered religions tend to express a great deal of
concern for the environment, and may hold religious ceremonies or rituals to bring
harmony and healing to nature (Robinson, 2009, & 2004).
Additionally, at the center of earth- centered religious consciousness is earthly
life, procreation, the passing of the phases of life, and the changing of the seasons (which
are conceptually and religiously correlated in some traditions). This sanctification of life
is not the concept that energizes the “right to life” movement; rather, it is more broad and
subtle. Therefore, the central value of earth-centered spirituality is not some absolute
11
“right to life” for human beings, but the celebration of life in all of its diversity—human
and nonhuman. (Barner-Barry, 2005)
Religious rituals. Like most faiths, earth- centered spiritual traditions have their
own religious rituals, or spiritual works guided by the culture’s symbolic reality. Though
there are numerous variations from tradition to tradition, many earth centered -religious
rituals are centered around initiation into the religious tradition; rites of passage such as
menarche, entrance into adulthood, childbirth, etc.; the healing of mind, body, spirit, and
community; the celebration of religious holidays, which sometimes include the full and
new moons, days sacred to particular god(dess)es and saints, and some combination of
the solstices, equinoxes, and cross-points between each.
Shared Impact of Social Location
Minority religious identity in America. Sigel (2001) delineated identity as an
individual's self-concept; what (s)he regards as essential to the nature of human beings is
viewed as a self-portrait that is internal, subjective, psychological, and normative More
succinctly, one can understand identity as “I, the we, and the not-we’” (Sigel, 2001). The
“we” of Sigel’s deconstruction of identity can also be understood as one’s social identity,
which Brewer suggested are comprised of four important aspects (2001). One’s social
identity, therefore, is comprised of (1) one’s sense of self and the meaning derived from
that sense of self; (2) one’s self in relation to others—i.e., one’s perception of self as a
“certain kind” of person; (3) one’s perception of self as an integral or interchangeable
part of a larger group or social unit; and (4) one’s collective group identity, or shared
representations of one’s group based upon common interests and experiences; which may
12
also be actively shaped by the group in order to forge an image of what the group stands
for and how it wishes to be viewed by others (Brewer, 2001).
Devotees of earth- centered religion are members of cultural and numerical
minorities in most of North America, Latin America, and Europe. Subsequently, both
their individual religious identities and all aspects of their social religious identities
denote them as members of a minority that is often misunderstood, disrespected, and/or
feared. Barner-Barry writes,
At best, to [practice earth religion] is to have your religion poorly understood or
misunderstood completely. At worst, it may mean that you have to be secretive
about your religion and your religious practices. This means being very careful
about revealing or being honest about one of the most primordial aspects of one’s
identity. It also tends to engender a consciousness that others, those in more
traditional religions, are socially rewarded for being open and honest about their
religious beliefs. Comparisons are inevitable (2005).
For some practitioners of earth- centered religion, (especially European/American
Pagans,) the “choice” to become a devotee of earth religion involves a separation from
one’s “inherited religion.” Though an increasing number of children have been born to
Pagan parents in past decades, many Pagans are born into traditionally religious families,
and become Pagan after an intense period of religious searching (Barner-Barry, 2005). In
such cases, the devotee is not only adopting a minority religious identity, (s)he is also
relinquishing the majority identity into which (s)he was born.
Moreover, an individual’s choice to embrace a minority religion by becoming a
devotee of earth religion forever changes that individual’s relationships with both those
13
inside and those outside of the religious tradition. Openly departing from one’s inherited
religion often causes others to accuse devotees of earth- centered religion of “rebelling”
or “acting out” against their family’s religion, or against particular family members who
encouraged or enforced the practice of that religion. While there may be some truth to
these accusations in the minority of cases, research suggests that more often, it is an
expression of the fact that one’s family’s religion was not the best one for that individual,
and that the search for religious authenticity has led that individual elsewhere (BarnerBarry, 2005).
Unfortunately, the impact of a minority religious identity is not limited to the
family and personal domain. For example, imagine an American citizen has said the
Pledge of Allegiance countless times, not thinking much about the statement ‘under
God.’ Then suppose that same person becomes a devotee of earth religion, specifically an
Isian, or an individual who worships the goddess Isis. Suddenly, the phrase “under God”
marks that individual as “other,” not wholly American, because the God referred to is
clearly the Judeo-Christian God, not Isis (Barner-Barry, 2005). Moreover, should the
Isian in question relay her/his concerns to others, (s)he is likely to be told by others that
invoking (the Judeo-Christian) God is central to American identity and traditions. This
individual will likely perceive that, where devotion to God may lead to acceptance,
devotion to Isis results in having one's beliefs trivialized and having the political system
into which (s)he was born view Isians as outsiders (Barner-Barry, 2005).
This sense of other and outside-ness was reinforced in 2004 when the U.S.
Supreme Court unanimously struck down a circuit court opinion that had called for the
removing of the phrase “under God” from the Pledge of Allegiance (Elk Grove Unified
14
School District v. Newdow, 2004). Subsequently, members of many minority religions,
including earth- centered religions, continue to be forced to pledge their allegiance to
their country in a way that forces them to acknowledge a god other than their own, and
that defines them as member of an out-group. When the Supreme Court ruling supported
the inclusion of the phrase “under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance, religious leaders
from diverse traditions released a statement calling for the removal of the phrase, noting
that this would merely return the Pledge to the way it was said before the 1954 addition
of “under God,” which was intended to distinguish a Christian United States from a
“godless” Soviet Union” (Barner-Barry, 2005). Moreover, at the time of the ruling, many
politicians and news commentators characterized the opposition to the inclusion of the
phrase as silly or unimportant. However, some argue that this position trivializes both
minority and majority religious identities, and also detracts from the gravity of the Pledge
of Allegiance (Barner-Barry, 2005).
Minority religious identity and Christian privilege. In the early 1800s,
Supreme Court Justice Story asserted that it was the duty of the American government to
foster and encourage Christianity (i.e. Protestantism) among United States citizens. This
perception of duty led to the creation of a body of statutes and common law that reflected
a mission to convert not only nonbelievers, but also those of other Christian traditions
(most notably Roman Catholic), as well as Native Americans. Though the law did not
provide any specific guidelines at the time, it was also assumed that slave “owners”
would convert enslaved Africans to Protestant Christianity. Subsequently, over the
centuries, Protestantism became the quintessentially American religion, and gave its
followers a sense of entitlement. Eventually, the idea that being a Christian was part of
15
the tradition of being a “real” American became firmly entrenched in the minds of most
Americans—resulting in today’s Christian privilege in United States society (BarnerBarry, 2005).
Duncan (2003) neatly summarized privilege as that which has been used
historically and currently for the primary purpose of defining and criticizing the
advantages that persons acquire as a result of individuals whose ideals and interests
mirror their own being in positions of power. Subsequently, in the United States and
numerous countries throughout the world, those who practice Christianity are clearly
privileged. Duncan continues, “despite a constitutional guarantee that the government of
the United States will be faceless when concerning religion, a system has developed that
has absorbed Christian practice at every turn…[and] Christians, including myself, have
been blind to the privilege we have experienced” (2003).
Moreover, privilege can be conceptualized by two elements. First, the societal
norm is defined by characteristics of the privileged group—often in a manner that
benefits the privileged group. Second, privileged group members do not experience
oppression based upon the diversity variable in which they are privileged, and can choose
whether or not they wish to object to the oppression of others (Wildman, 1995).
However, this does not imply that members of privileged groups are inherently wicked or
bad. Because the societal norm is defined by characteristics of the privileged group,
privilege is rarely seen by the holder of that privilege. Nonetheless, silence plays an
important role in privilege, as what is not spoken is never talked about, which results in
maintenance of the status quo (Wildman, 1995). In the case of Christian, or majority
religious privilege, in addition to the silence of those who do not realize that they are
16
privileged, there is the silence of those who “believe that their privileges of being in a
better-treated class are actually affirmative rights guaranteed by the government and by
God” (Barner-Barry, 2005). Finally, though silence plays an important role in the
maintenance of the status quo, the silence of minority religions in regard to their own
oppression should not be interpreted as consent to oppressive acts of the majority. Rather,
this silence would better be attributed to the negative consequences of speaking out
(Barner-Barry, 2005).
In some cases, those in power may earnestly believe that they have the right to
mold others based upon their conceptualization of what is normal, and may be unable or
unwilling to recognize the rights of the disempowered. This belief in one’s own
superiority and lack of objectivity has informed the construction of the United States
legal system, and in many cases, allowed Christian privilege to continue (Duncan, 2003).
As anthropology professor Sally E. Merry observed, “law not only constructs
authoritative visions of the social world, but also exerts force behind these interpretations.
It not only establishes one way of construing events but silences others, thus channeling
and determining the outcome of legal proceedings” (1992). Barner-Barry suggests that
both the attempt to impose religious conformity as well as the actual suppression of
religious nonconformity arise from the idea that there is only one basic religious
orientation that is good, right, and true (2005). Similarly, Post (2003) asserts that law is
commonly understood as enforcing the following senses of the community (which most
people are thought to entertain): decency, propriety, morality, and common sense.
The minority/majority religious dynamic is heavily influenced by the terms that
are used to describe each side’s position. Those who oppose strict separation of
17
(Christian) church and state often refer to their opponents as “irreligious”, “against
religion,” or worse. Similarly, they also refer to cases wherein Christianity and politics
intersect as “traditional” or “secular” (Sherry, 1998). Furthermore, though most
governmental religious expressions carefully restrict themselves to “secular,”
nondenominational invocations of “God” solely, (rather than Jesus Christ, or other sacred
Christian figures,) it is clear to all that the “God” invoked is Judeo-Christian (BarnerBarry, 2005). However, Warren poignantly asks if “any respectful mention of God or
Jesus ever be truly secular? Why would Christians want it to be? When does God stop
being the central deity in their worship and become a social choice? And, if God is a
social choice, is religious piety mere conformity with a social norm?” (2003).
While most Christians would not evangelize or approach conversion in a harsh or
punitive manner, they give Christian privilege and federal “evangelizing” tacit support
and encouragement when they remain silent and permit the expression of Christian
ethnocentrism in many governmental practices (Barner-Barry, 2005). A mild example of
this phenomenon can be seen in recent legislation regarding the Ohio state motto, “With
God, All Things Are Possible.” The American Civil Liberty Union contested the
constitutionality of the motto in the 2001 court case ACLU v. Capitol Square Review and
Advisory Board. The court ruled that the motto did not violate the Establishment Clause
of the First Amendment, so long as it did not attribute the words to their source in the
New Testament’s Book of Matthew, Chapter 19 Verse 26 (Barner-Barry, 2005).
A more vitriolic example of this phenomenon can be seen in the 1992 Hiaheah
City Council deliberations that resulted in a law that prevented Santeríans from building a
house of worship in Hiaheah, Florida. During these deliberations, a city council official
18
stated that Santería “[is] in violation of everything this country stands for.” The Hiaheah
City Council debated “what the Bible allows,” and the Police Department chaplain stated
on record, “We need to be helping people and sharing with them the truth that is found in
Jesus Christ…I would exhort you not to permit this church to exist.” (Church of Lukumi
Babalu Aye v. Hiaheah). Though the case was eventually taken to the Supreme Court,
which ruled in favor of the Church of Lukumi Babalu Aye, this case clearly demonstrated
Christian ethnocentrism and privilege in United States government (Barner-Barry, 2005).
Minority religious identity and ceremonial deism. Former Yale Law School
Dean Walter Rostow is credited with creating the term “ceremonial deism” in 1962.
Ceremonial deism was defined as public religious activities that were (according to
Rostow) so traditional and uncontroversial that they did not violate the Establishment
Clause of the First Amendment (Epstein, 1996), which states “Congress shall make no
law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” (U.S.
Constitution). Epstein also asserted that ceremonial deistic practices involve the
invocation of “God” (and sometimes Jesus) in connection with governmentally sponsored
practices that are “symbolic, or ritualistic,” including “prayer, invocation, benediction,
supplication, appeal, reverent reference to, or embrace of, a general or particular deity”
(1993). These symbolic or ritualistic practices are “created, delivered, sponsored, or
encouraged by government officials…during governmental functions or ceremonies, in
the form of patriotic expressions, or associated with holiday observances.” “In and of
themselves…[they are] unlikely to indoctrinate or proselytize their audience” and are not
“specifically designed to accommodate the free religious exercise of a particular group of
19
citizens” (Epstein, 1996). Moreover, most ceremonial deistic practices are “deeply rooted
in the nation’s history and traditions” (Epstein, 1996).
Epstein continues his exploration of ceremonial deism, and documented the
following practices as exemplifications of governmental ceremonial deism in the United
States:
1)
2)
3)
4)
Legislative prayers and prayer rooms
Prayers at presidential inaugurations
Presidential addresses invoking the name of God
The invocation “God save the United States and this Honorable Court” prior
to judicial proceedings
5) Oaths of public officers, court witnesses, and jurors and the use of the Bible to
administer such oaths
6) The use of “in the year of our Lord” to date public documents
7) Thanksgiving and Christmas holidays
8) The National Day of Prayer
9) The addition of the words “under God” to the Pledge of Allegiance
10) The national motto of “In God We Trust.”
Moreover, after a thorough investigation of each example, Epstein concludes that all but
one of these examples (presidential addresses invoking the name of God) are in violation
of the Establishment Clause as it is normally interpreted by the Supreme Court.
Presidential invocations of God were considered constitutional, as it is very difficult to
legally draw a line between the individual and the office when the President speaks
(Epstein, 1996).
Proponents of ceremonial deism suggest that references to “God” are unobjectionable,
because the term is “an all-encompassing, unifying national force,” and also because
official references to “God” have historically been considered unobjectionable and
traditional (Barner-Barry, 2005).
Barner-Barry wryly suggests that one try substituting the names “Athena,”
“Brahma,” or “Allah” in official examples of ceremonial deism where the term “God” is
20
currently used and considered unobjectionable. For example, “Brahma save the United
States and this Honorable Court,” or “In Athena We Trust” (2005). Imagine if the
president took her/his oath with her/his hand on the Quran, and ended it with “so help me
Allah”? To many Americans who are not Christian or Jewish, this is how the current
practice of ceremonial deism appears (Barner-Barry, 2005). Moreover, many Pagans
have expressed that ceremonial references to a clearly Judeo-Christian God implicitly
exclude both them and others who are adherents of minority faiths or no faith at all. Some
have also disclosed that these references make them feel like second-class citizens, but
most share the sentiment that this is a battle they have little hope of winning. Some
devotees of polytheistic religions cope with their feelings about constitutional deism’s
religious exclusion with humor, such as joking, “In the Gods We Trust” (Barner-Barry,
2005).
However, Mary Lou Schmidt, a Pagan woman in Topeka, Kansas, objected to
Shawnee County Treasurer Rita Cline’s posting of signs declaring “In God We Trust” on
the walls of offices in the courthouse and a mall annex. The signs measured 11 by 14
inches, and the word God was printed in bright red letters and was significantly larger
than the black lettering on the rest of the poster. Moreover, “the notation that this was the
national motto was barely visible” (Barner-Barry, 2005). When Ms. Schmidt contacted
Ms. Cline to request the removal of the posters, Ms. Cline responded with a letter saying,
“I understand you say you are a pagan, do not believe in God, and refuse to recognize or
honor the American flag and our national motto, all while claiming to be an American
citizen. Your statements surprised me and caused me to question your patriotism and
wonder just how much of an American you really are” (Schmidt v. Cline; Richardson,
21
May 20, 2000). Cline refused to remove her posters, prompting Schmidt to complain to
the American Civil Liberty Union, which took her case. Shortly thereafter, the executive
director of the ACLU’s Kansas City office then received a letter in which Cline told him
she was praying for him (Barner-Barry, 2005).
U.S. District Judge Sam A. Crow dismissed the case on December 6, 2000, and in
2001 ordered the ACLU to pay Cline’s legal fees of $8,130. Crow ruled that Schmidt
“lacked standing to obtain an injunction, because she failed to meet the burden of
demonstrating that she would face a likelihood of future harm as a result of [Cline]’s
conduct, as is necessary to warrant injunctive relief” (Schmidt v. Cline; Barner-Barry,
2005). He also ruled that the case was moot, as the signs at issue had been replaced with
new (larger) ones that measured 16 x 20 inches, including the bald eagle on the American
$1 bill and lettering similar to that on US currency, as well as the date that Congress
adopted the phrase as the country’s motto (Barner-Barry, 2005; Henrickson, September
20, 2000). Judge Crow also stated that an injunction requiring Ms. Cline to remove the
signs could infringe upon her free speech, and that Schmidt’s claim that the signs violated
the Establishment Clause was “patently frivolous without any basis in law” (Schmidt v.
Cline; Barner-Barry, 2005).
Ms. Schmidt responded to the ruling by stating, “The lawsuit had everything to do
with…being told that I can’t be a citizen of the United States because I don’t believe in
God. Judge Crow doesn’t seem to understand that” (Henrikson, December 13, 2000). The
ACLU was left with a debt of $8,130 plus interest for Ms. Cline’s legal fees—a sizable
sum which was difficult for the organization to raise. Moreover, Ms. Cline became a
22
local political hero, until she left office under suspicion of alleged misappropriation of
county funds (Barner-Barry, 2005).
The acceptance of ceremonial deism has led to many practices that extend its
original, intended reach. For instance, the Board of Supervisors in a Virginia county
“decreed that Judeo-Christian prayers were constitutional—because they are part of
something called ‘American Civil Religion” (Barner-Barry, 2005) The Board also
included Muslim prayers on their list of constitutional prayers, because they are
monotheistic. However, they rejected prayers from non-monotheistic faiths, including
Hinduism, Buddhism, and Wicca (Barner-Barry, 2005). Generally, individuals who
advocate prayer at public functions do not want to include prayers from a range of
religions—it’s usually a call for Christian prayer. For example, ten years after
abandoning the practice of regular prayer at council meetings, the Salt Lake County
Council voted to re-establish regular prayers. When an assistant county attorney informed
the council that they would legally be to include all religions, including Paganism and
Native American traditions, the council had second thoughts. They resolved to formally
entrust the task to a police or National Guard chaplain who would, undoubtedly, be
Christian (Barner-Barry, 2005; Eddington, January 24, 2001).
In Virginia, the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors maintained a list of
volunteer clergy. Cynthia Simpson, a practicing Pagan priestess, requested to be added to
the volunteer clergy list, and was rebuffed. In a letter sent by the County Attorney, Ms.
Simpson was informed, “Chesterfield’s non-sectarian invocations are traditionally made
to a divinity that is consistent with the Judeo-Christian tradition. Based on our review of
Wicca, it is neo-pagan and invokes polytheistic, pre-Christian deities. Accordingly, we
23
cannot honor your request to be included on the list of religious leaders that are invited to
provide invocations at the meetings of the Board of Supervisors” (S.L. Micas, personal
communication, September 12, 2002). Ms. Simpson then enlisted the help of the
American Civil Liberties Union and Americans United for Separation of Church and
State, and took the county to court (Barner-Barry, 2005).
In this case, the U.S. District Court ruled that legislative prayer is not, in and of
itself, unconstitutional. However, it did question the “nonsectarian” nature of the prayers
given, and noted that between January 2000 and December 2003, 76 individuals had
given invocations and only three were not Christian. Of the three, one was a rabbi and
two were Muslim leaders (Barner-Barry, 2005). Additionally, the court noted that
Chesterfield County’s “policy, as enforced, has allowed, if not encouraged, the specific
mention of the Judeo-Christian deity as well as the name of Jesus Christ…and it
precludes the expression of common themes that would still serve the same public
interest even though the speaker may be the representative of a religion outside that
sanctioned by the policy” (Simpson v. Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors).
Therefore, the court ruled that “if government establishes a forum in which it invites a
class of speakers for a specific purpose, it cannot exclude some class members because of
a difference in viewpoint…Such a policy of exclusion cannot survive constitutional
scrutiny” (Simpson v. Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors). Soon after the ruling,
Chesterfield County expressed its intent to appeal the decision (Barner-Barry, 2005).
Similarly, the Town Council of Great Falls, South Carolina, meetings also opened
with a prayer. In this case, a Council member would lead the prayer. Great Falls citizen
Darla Wynne, a Wiccan, objected to the fact that there were frequent references to Jesus,
24
Jesus Christ, or Savior in the prayers. Moreover, when she arrived late to one meeting in
order to avoid the prayer, she was not allowed to speak at the meeting, even though she
was listed on the agenda. When Ms. Wynne requested that the invocation of Christ be
discontinued, the Council refused. Ms. Wynne took the case to court, which ruled that
while legislative prayer was constitutional, “the practice of members of Town Council
invoking the name(s) specifically associated with the Christian faith at Town Council
meetings violates the Establishment Clause.” The ruling specifically prohibited town
officials “from invoking or permitting another to invoke the name of a specific deity
associated with any one specific faith or belief in prayers given at Town Council
meetings” (Wynne v. Great Falls). Great Falls Town Council appealed the decision,
which was affirmed by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in 2004. However, in the
meantime, Darla Wynne, who had already suffered years of harassment by town officials
and members of the public, came home to find her pet parrot “beheaded and affixed with
a note reading ‘You’re next’.” The parrot also had its heart ripped out (Barner-Barry,
2005).
Finally, a similar case is also in the court system in Florida. The Manatee County
School Board had a long-standing practice of saying the Lord’s Prayer at the beginning of
its meetings. Recently, they instituted “nonsectarian” invocations given by local ministers
in order to avoid a lawsuit. However, the nonsectarian prayers remained exclusively
Christian. When asked about this issue, the leader of Manatee Religious Services stated,
“I would simply say to someone who is uncomfortable where they are: move.” (BarnerBarry, 2005). At the time of the publication of Barner-Barry’s text, the case was still in
the court system (2005).
25
Subsequently, is difficult to disagree with Epstein’s conclusion, “if…the court
means what it says when it espouses the principle that government may not, consistent
with the Establishment Clause, endorse religion and send messages to citizens that cause
them to feel like outsiders in the political community, the Court should have the
intellectual honesty and fortitude to recognize that ceremonial deism violates a core
purpose of the Establishment Clause” (1996).
Differences in Social Location Between Earth Religions
While devotees of earth religions share a minority religious identity, they can vary
widely on other diversity variables such as race and ethnicity, national origin, native
tongue, socioeconomic status, and education level. Research suggests that
European/American Pagans are predominantly white, middle class, and well-educated
(Berger, 1999). Most devotees of Native American spirituality do not include non-natives
in their concept of the Native American religious community. Subsequently, devotees of
Native American spirituality generally have predominantly Native American (also known
as First Nations, American Indian, and Alaskan Native) heritage, or a blend of Native
American and other cultural heritage. Moreover, approximately 26% of Native
Americans live below the poverty line, which contrasts sharply with the 13% of the
general population which lives in poverty (National Alliance on Mental Illness, 2007).
Even more diverse in its makeup, Yoruban and Dahomey African diaspora faith
include (at least) devotees of Santería in Cuba, practitioners of Candomblé in Brazil, and
devotees of Vodou in Haiti. Each of these nations has its own unique, painful, and
resilient histories of the interaction and blending of African, indigenous, and European
cultures (Murphy, 1994). Whereas Cuban Santería is characterized by a blending of
26
Yoruban African, Spanish, and indigenous American cultures; Brazilian Candomblé is
distinguished by the synthesis of Yoruban African, Portuguese, and some indigenous
American cultures. In contrast, Haitian (and New Orleans) Vodou is characterized by the
fusion of Dahomey African, French, and indigenous American cultures (Murphy, 1994;
Fandrich, 2007). Moreover, with some exceptions, the majority of devotees of Yoruban
and Dahomey African diaspora faiths in Cuba, Haiti, and Brazil live in lower
socioeconomic statuses—and in some cases, extreme poverty (Murphy, 1994).
Yoruban and Dahomey Traditional African Religions
Ancient and recent history. There are three major earth- centered faiths that
developed in the Caribbean based upon the religious practices of enslaved Yoruban and
Dahomey Africans who were forcibly brought to the Caribbean islands and the Americas.
These faiths are Santería of Cuba, Candomblé of Brazil, and Vodou of Haiti. Santería and
Candomblé can be conceptualized as Yoruban African diaspora traditions, as they
evolved primarily from the religious traditions of enslaved Africans of Yoruban descent;
whereas Vodou can be conceptualized as a Dahomey African diaspora religion, as it
evolved primarily from the religious traditions of enslaved Africans of Dahomey descent.
These three faiths grew out of the slave trades of the religions’ early days. In the late 15th
through 18th centuries, Yoruban and Dahomey natives were abducted from Africa and
unwillingly transported to Cuba, Haiti, Brazil, Trinidad, Puerto Rico and the Dominican
Republic among other Caribbean islands. Enslaved Yoruban and Dahomey individuals
brought their traditions and powerful faith in their deities with them to the Caribbean.
Though many were unwillingly baptized into Roman Catholicism and forced to officially
abandon their traditional beliefs and practices, they creatively fused and concealed their
27
traditional beliefs by choosing Catholic saints and associating saints to each of the orisha
(gods or spirits) of their traditional religious practices (Robinson, 2010; Fandrich, 2007).
Through the camouflage of European saints, Yoruban and Dahomey Africans were able
to invoke, feed, and celebrate their orishas, in turn hoping for divine protection and
assistance (Fandrich, 2007).
Even after the abolishment of slavery, traditional Yoruban and Dahomey faiths
have been suppressed in many of their Caribbean homes. Santería has been actively
suppressed in Cuba since the communist revolution, especially during the 1960's.
However, the official suppression of Santería in Cuba has primarily ceased, and its
popularity and practice has significantly increased since the 1990s (Robinson, 2010).
Moreover, in the 1970s and 80s, a significant number of African-Americans began
practicing Orisha Voodoo, which sought to return to African religious roots. In the style
of Marcus Garvey and the Nation of Islam, devotees of Orisha Voodoo sought freedom
from the oppression of “white man’s religion,” or Christianity, and began to seek out
traditional African as well as African diaspora faiths. In the spirit of sankofa
(Akan/Ashanti for “return to the ways of your ancestors” or “go back to your roots”),
many devotees of Orisha Voodoo were initiated into Cuban Santerían and Haitian
Vodouisant traditions (Fandrich, 2007).
Cosmology and conceptualization of divinity. Most Yoruban and Dahomey
African diaspora traditions usually practice some form of ancestor veneration and also
worship a pantheon of divine spirits, such as the orisha/orixa of Santería and Candomblé,
and the lwa of Haitian Vodou. In most traditions, Olorun or Olódùmarè (the “owner of
heaven”) is conceptualized as the creator of the universe and a supreme deity (not
28
dissimilar from the Christian concepts of God or Creator). Olódùmarè is also the creator
of the “lesser” guardians, known as ori(sha/xa) or lwa. There are hundreds of ori(sha/xa)
or lwa, however, those that actually originated from the Dahomey lands are called Rada,
whereas those that were added later and were often based upon deceased leaders in the
new world are called Petro. Moreover, each of the ori(sha/xa) or lwa have an associated
Christian saint, principle, important number, color, food, dance posture and emblem
(Robinson, 2010). In most traditions, the orisha or lwa require food in the form of animal
sacrifice and/or prepared dishes, as well as human worship in order to remain effective
(Robinson, 2010).
Ethics and values. The Yoruban and Dahomey worldviews value the
maintenance of balance within one’s life, one’s family, one’s community, and the world
at large. Iwe pele (literally, generous character/personal destiny), or “the gentle
generosity of a person who lives according to the traditional way of life” is highly valued.
In this worldview, the universal ethical goal is to “achieve a generous or gentle character
within the confines of one’s destiny,” thereby exhibiting both individualism and
conformity to community standards (Clark, 2007). Furthermore, one’s ancestors, called
Ara Orun (People of Heaven), are referred to for moral guidance and example, and are
honored at family ceremonies through recitation of their names (Robinson, 2010). Like
the traditional Native American worldview, the Yoruban and Dahomey worldview can be
conceptualized through the statement we are, therefore I am.
Moreover, as the Yoruban and Dahomey worldview conceptualizes the world as
singular—that is, there is no this world and another world, but a single world with visible
and invisible elements—everything that can be perceived (as well as that which cannot)
29
is sacred. Therefore, people, animals, plants, rain, the ocean, mountains, rocks, and stars
are all considered sacred (Clark, 2007).
Sects and terms.
Lucumi/Santerían. Devotees of Lucumi or Santería may identify with many
different labels, not all of which are mutually exclusive. A general practitioner of Lucumi
or Santería may identify as a santero/a, depending upon the practitioner’s gender. Aleyos
(sometimes also called aborishas) are non-priest members of an ile, or a group of priests,
priestesses, godchildren, and other practitioners who assemble to worship and study.
Iyawos are non-priest members of an ile who are in their first year of initiation. (The
word iyawo is sometimes also used to describe the sacred room wherein initiation rituals
are held). Babalawos are Lucumi priests who are also diviners and herbalists, but who do
not become possessed by the orisha, or divine. Babalorishas and iyalorishas are Lucumi
priest(esse)s who have initiated “godchildren,” or who have initiated other practitioners
into the faith. Finally, brujo/a is the Spanish word for witch, and is sometimes used to
describe individuals who identify with some aspects of Santería/Lucumi, as well as some
aspects of brujería or curanderismo (Latino influenced witchcraft or shamanism) (Clark,
2007, & Murphy, 1994).
Candomblezeiro. As the primary differences between Candomblé and Lucumi are
linguistic and geographical, some of the terms used to describe initiates of Candomblé are
similar to or the same as those used in Lucumi. A general practitioner Candomblé may
identify as a candomblezeiro. Aleyos are non-priest members of an ile, or a group of
priests, priestesses, godchildren, and other practitioners who assemble to worship and
study. Iyawos are non-priest members of an ile who are in their first year of initiation.
30
(The word iyawo is sometimes also used to describe the sacred room wherein initiation
rituals are held). Maes-de-santo are Candomblé priestesses, while paes-de-santos are
Candomblé priests. Ogas and ekejis (oga = masculine, ekeji = feminine) are also
Candomblé priests and priestesses, however, unlike maes-de-santo and paes-de-santos,
they are not possessed by the orisha. Finally, babalorixas and iyalorixas are Candomblé
priest(esse)s who have initiated “godchildren,” or who have initiated other practitioners
into the faith (Murphy, 1994).
Vodouisant. Devotees of Vodou may identify with many different labels, not all
of which are mutually exclusive. A general practitioner of Vodou may identify as a
vodouisant. (Robinson, 2010, & Murphy, 1994). Initiates of Vodou who assist priests and
priestesses, and may be studying to become a priest or priestess are known as hounsis.
Finally, Vodouisant high priestesses may identify as mambos or manbos, while a
Vodouisant high priest may identify as houngans (Robinson, 2010, & Murphy, 1994).
Rituals.
Santerían initiation ritual. In the Cuban tradition of Santería, an individual is
initiated into the tradition through a ritual referred to as hacer santo, “to make the saint”;
coronación, (crowning); asiento, (seating); or kariocha, (to place the orisha on the head)
(Murphy, 1994). However, individuals generally do not simply “up and decide” to
engage in a Santerían initiation ceremony—or any initiation ceremony for that matter. It
generally takes the form of receiving some sort of call or compulsion which cannot be
ignored, which in the case of Santería, an orisha (god/spirit) will make his/her presence
known in the life of a future initiate, who will then receive confirmation from a babalawo
that (s)he is being called to service, and by whom.
31
The initiate then gathers ingredients sacred to the orisha, and begins to enter the
ceremony which will make them a symbolic spouse of this spirit. Stones known as otanes
are gathered in places sacred to the specific orisha, and the orisha’s favorite foods are
gathered or prepared. An iyawo, or sacred room is prepared for the initiate to be isolated
for several days. The initiation ritual focuses on the head of the initiate, which is shaved
and receives several ritual incisions. The initiate is subjected to numerous ritual
proscriptions, some of which extend for a year after the conclusion of the ritual, (such as
the wearing of white, covering of the head, etc.), and is educated in the nature and secrets
of her/his orisha. Throughout the course of the ritual, the initiate is usually guided by a
babalawo and/or santero/a(s), who provide instruction, and use dilogun (divination)
readings to determine the course of the ritual and the initiate’s path. At the conclusion of
the initiation ritual, the initiate is re-presented to the community and to the orishas as a
new individual en santo (Murphy, 1994).
Candombleizero initiation ritual. In the Brazilian tradition of Candomblé, an
individual is called to service of the tradition and service of a particular orixá (spirit/god)
by some massive disruption in that individual’s life. It is generally understood that these
unfortunate circumstances or series of circumstances will not cease until the individual
experiencing them undergoes an obrigação, or initiation ceremony. In the case of
Candomblé, however, it is understood more literally that the initiate must “die” in her/his
normal world and consciousness, and re-emerge into a new world and consciousness
following this initiation ceremony. The initiate must feed, bathe, and care for a stone
which symbolizes the particular spirit by whom they have been called, and also prepares
specific foods sacred to her/his orixá. An initiate will then undergo a six-month isolation
32
period in a special dwelling known as a runkô, with other individuals who are also
undergoing the obrigação at that time. Individuals united by confinement in a runkô are
said to be “members of the same boat,” which may allude to the connection between
slave ships and the roots of the African diaspora traditions (Murphy, 1994).
Like in Santería, a focus upon the head of the initiate can be observed in this
ceremony, via the ritual cutting, washing, and shaving of an initiate’s hair, followed by a
ritual cutting of the initiate’s scalp. Initiates are subject to numerous ritual proscriptions,
sometimes varying based upon their patron orixá, and also receive educations specific to
the nature and the characteristics of their orixá. Initiates are often possessed by child-like
spirits, which transform into the orixás themselves. Once an initiate has officially been
“possessed” by their orixá, it is believed that the orixá has entered the head of the initiate.
The initiate is now re-classified as an iaôs, or spouse of the orixá, and re-presented to the
community as such (Murphy, 1994).
Vodouisant initiation ritual. In the Haitian tradition of Vodou, an individual is
initiated into the tradition through a ritual referred to as lave tèt, and more specifically,
the kouche. In his text Working the Spirit, Murphy recounts the lave tèt ceremony of
1940s dancer Katherine Dunham (1994). One generally does not simply “up and decide”
to engage in a lave tèt ceremony—or any initiation ceremony for that matter. It generally
takes the form of receiving some sort of call or compulsion which cannot be ignored,
which in the case of Vodou, is understood as the initiate being called by a lwa, or
spirit/god. Oftentimes this call may manifest as a string of unfortunate events, which may
be interpreted by a religious figure or seer such as a manbo or houngan to be the call of
the lwa to that individual to undergo a lave tèt ceremony (Murphy, 1994).
33
The term lave tèt is derived from the French “to wash the head,” and this parallel
can be seen in the way in which the actual head of an initiate is treated during ceremony.
Once the mèt tèt, or specific lwa who has summoned an individual to undergo the
initiation ceremony has been identified, the initiate begins copious preparations related to
that specific lwa in order to undergo the ritual. In the case of Dunham, the dancer was
required to gather “a new nightdress, a new ceremonial dress, a necklace of blue and
white trade beads interspersed with snake vertebrae, a pair of white roosters, florida
water, barley water, strawberry soda, sugar cookies, eggs, herbs, roots, powders, a picture
of St. Patrick, and another of the Virgin Mary,” (Murphy, 1994).
Following the gathering of the necessary ingredients, the initiate undergoes a
three-day isolation period in which (s)he is confined to the floor, lying in spoon fashion
with the other individuals to be initiated, and subject to copious ritual proscriptions
regarding movement, the consumption of food, washing, and bodily functions. The
physical arrangement of these initiates has been likened by some to the manner in which
slaves were forced to lie on slave ships, which some reference as a possible connection to
the historical roots of the Vodou tradition. The heads of the initiates are anointed with a
poultice which relates to their specific lwa, then wrapped with white cloth which will
remain on the initiates’ heads until ritually removed at the end of the ceremony.
At the conclusion of the three-day isolation and purification period, initiates are
often tested in their knowledge of their lwa, and if all proceeds well, will frequently
“receive” or become possessed by that lwa. When the initiate “receives” the lwa, that
individual’s gwo bònanj, or psyche, is essentially displaced by the lwa, and relocates to a
specially prepared container referred to as a pot tèt, which generally also contains
34
ingredients related to that individual’s mèt tèt. The pot tèts are then ritually sealed by the
manbo, and one week after the closing of this ritual ceremony or ritual marriage to a
particular mèt tèt, the initiate will have their head poultice ritually removed, the
ingredients placed in the pot tèt, and will officially re-emerge as an initiate of the
tradition, and a spiritual spouse of a lwa (Murphy, 1994).
Native American Spirituality
Ancient and recent history. Even with the passing of the American Indian
Religious Freedom Act in 1994, Native American spirituality, as well as Native
American life in its totality, is still greatly shaped by European-American power and
privilege. Since 1492, the interaction of Native Americans and Europeans has been a
harrowing tale of conflict and brutal violence—the vast majority of which was
perpetrated by Europeans (Martin, 1999). It is believed that there were somewhere
between 1.2 and 12 million Native Americans living in North America at the time of the
European arrival and invasion. By the end of the 19th century, however, that number had
been reduced to 250,000, primarily due to European disease, slavery, dislocation, mass
murder and genocide (Robinson, 2009).
The Civilization Regulations and Courts of Indian Offenses of the late 1800s
prohibited Native Americans from practicing their spirituality, and in many ways,
completely forbade them from living their way of life (Martin, 1999). The Dawes Act of
1887 attempted to isolate older Native Americans to reservations, and attempted to detribalize Native American nations by forcing those on reservations to live in private
homes and farm the poorest land—whether or not their culture was traditionally agrarian.
Additionally, the Dawes Act also forced Native American children to attend “Indian
35
schools,” where they were “educated” in European ways and forbidden to speak their
own language, sing their own songs, wear their traditional clothing, or practice their own
spirituality. Perhaps most insultingly, Native Americans were not “granted” citizenship to
their own land until 1924 (Martin, 1999).
Though there has been and continues to be active Native American resistance to
European-American oppression, the colonization of North America by European nations
devastated the Native American way of life. Even today, most of the counties where
Native American reservations are located are identified as the most impoverished places
in the entire country. In some cases, the living conditions on Native American
reservations are comparable to those in developing nations, or “third-world” countries
(Martin, 1999). Without a doubt, it is of the utmost importance that helping professionals
familiarize themselves with Native American history, culture, and tradition, and begin to
strive towards serving this highly underserved population.
Cosmology and conceptualization of divinity. Due to the relative isolation of
the Native American nations that were spread out across the entire breadth of the North
American continent for thousands of years, a great deal of diversity in beliefs and
practices evolved between tribes. However, Native American spirituality is often
characterized by pantheism, or the belief that God and the material world are one and that
God is present in everything; a strong emphasis on the importance of personal spirituality
and its interconnectivity with daily life; and a deep connection between the natural and
spiritual worlds (Robinson, 2009). However, many devotees of traditional Native
American spirituality do not conceptualize their spiritual beliefs and practices as
“religion.” Rather, they see the whole culture and social structure as spiritual, and
36
therefore, spirituality is an inherent part of culture, and culture is an inherent part of
spirituality.
Most Native American spiritualities espouse the principle of an all embracing,
universal and omniscient Great Spirit (sometimes known as Wakan Tanka) (Martin,
1999). Some traditions may also include spirits and/or divine beings such as the First
People, White Buffalo Calf Woman or Changing Woman, Kokopelli, Tatewari, Caribou
Master, Spider Woman, and others. In some cases, spirits and divine beings are
considered spiritual beings “beneath” the Great Spirit, while in other traditions, they may
be considered manifestations of the Great Spirit. Finally, connection to the earth through
plants, animals, the passage of seasons, weather, the earth itself, water, sky, and fire is
paramount in Native American cosmology (Gill, 1982).
Ethics and values. A worldview, or a particular individual’s comprehension of
her/his reality generally includes social or cultural rules, many of which do not vary
greatly from culture to culture. The violation of a major social or cultural rule is
considered a “taboo,” many of which are also similar from culture to culture. Taboos in
most human societies include death and “improper” treatment of the dead, murder or
unjustified killing, cannibalism, and incest. However, aside from some overarching,
seemingly universal cultural rules and cultural proscriptions, individual cultures’ societal
rules and worldviews may vary greatly from one another (Gill, 1982).
The compilation of cultural rules and proscriptions which may be unique to a
culture comprise its symbolic reality. Subsequently, most traditional Native American
languages have no word for “nature.” The term “Mother Earth” was created to attempt to
better explain the Native American relationship with nature; however, in Native
37
American symbolic reality, there is no schism between humans and nature. In Native
American symbolic reality, food is sacred and killing is taboo, therefore, one must ask
permission to hunt or harvest another living being. Animals are often conceptualized as
four-legged people—and animals and plants give themselves to humans in exchange for
respect and permission to harvest or hunt. Native American symbolic reality also includes
a belief in spirit animals, or animal beings who possess power and wisdom which they
can choose to share with humans through dreams and visions (Gill, 1982; Erdoes & Ortiz,
1984).
In comparison with European and European-American society, Native American
culture is traditionally far more collectivistic, and therefore, family and community
oriented. Moreover, the Native American concept of family often extends far beyond the
nuclear family, and embraces its village, larger culture, and the earth itself (Robinson,
2009). The traditional Native American worldview can be conceptualized through the
statement we are, therefore I am.
Sects and terms. There are no known terms to identify “general” devotees of
Native American spirituality, thus, the researcher-identified term that will be used is
practitioner of Native American spirituality. However, some members of the Native
American community refer to the practice of Native American spirituality as “walking
the red road” (Glucklich, 2011). In contrast, medicine women and medicine men are
racially and/or culturally Native American individuals who may heal physical and/or
psychological disease, promote social and natural harmony, and bridge the natural and
spiritual worlds for the benefit of the Native American community. Shamans, like
medicine people, are trained spiritual individuals who bridge the natural and spiritual
38
worlds for the benefit of the community. However, in comparison with Native American
medicine, shamanism applies to more cultures than just Native American, and also
focuses somewhat more on the use of altered states of consciousness to heal physical
and/or psychological disease, and to promote social and natural harmony (Gill, 1982,
Gill, 1983, & Martin, 1999).
Rituals. Though they vary greatly from culture to culture, rituals can be
conceptualized as spiritual works to actively accomplish something. Rituals are guided by
a culture’s symbolic reality, and usually indicate a wish for spirits and/or the universe to
respond in some beneficial way. Some argue that according to the Native American
worldview, humans are not inherently human—and that a human being—and that being’s
social identity must therefore be created by learning his/her culture’s ways (Gill, 1983).
Oftentimes, the cues to “become human” are biological, transitional points in the human
life cycle, and accompanied by rituals or rites of passage.
Rites of passage.
The Kinaalda. The four-day Kinaalda ceremony of the Navajo occurs shortly after
a Navajo girl’s first menstruation. Navajo tradition propounds that Changing Woman, the
creator of humanity and daughter of First Man and First Woman, honored her own first
menses by creating the Kinaalda ceremony. In the course of the Kinaalda, the girl’s hair
is first combed, then tied back by an older woman of the tribe, thereby honoring and
channeling the visual display of her sexual power. The elder then massages the girl, and
molds her body into the shape of a woman’s. The girl then dresses in the ceremonial
clothing and jewelry of the Kinaalda, which generally includes some element of white
shells and/or the stone turquoise, as they are sacred to Changing Woman. Next, the
39
Kinaalda begins a footrace towards the east, both to prove her strength, and to symbolize
her connection with creation, for like the rising sun, she can now create and give birth
(Gill, 1983).
After her run, she begins to grind corn for the Kinaalda ceremonial cake, and on
the third day, she begins to prepare the cornmeal mush and circular firepit for the corn
cake. Once the mush is poured into the firepit and a round cake is formed, the Kinaalda
sprinkles cornmeal over the baking corncake to the east, south, west, north, and around
the firepit. As the cake bakes, sacred Navajo hogan songs are sung by the nation. Once
the cake is ready, the Kinaalda cuts and distributes it to the village—being certain to
dedicate pieces from the north, east, south, and west to the center of the firepit, as an
offering to Mother Earth. The symbolism of creating a cake or bread speaks primarily of
fertility, for grain is symbolic of the fertility of the earth, and also the staple of the human
diet; while a round corn cake is highly suggestive of the womb, further enforcing the
notion of fertility at the advent of womanhood (Gill, 1983).
The vision quest. Similar to the Kinaalda ceremony, it is the vision quest which
transitions boys of many First Nations from childhood to adulthood. The vision quest
generally involves elements of ritual purification, such as fasting and/or undergoing a
sweat lodge ceremony, and when the quester is considered clean and pure enough, he
embarks upon the vision quest (Ridington & Ridington, 1971). Once the boy has been
ritually purified, he will usually isolate himself from the rest of society, (often atop a
mountain or in a tree,) and eat or drink nothing or very little for a period of several days.
During this isolation, the boy is to contemplate his relationship with the Great Creator
40
(Wakan Tanka) and with all living beings, and is to freely welcome dreams and visions
which will explain his purpose in life.
Oftentimes, a vision quester may see and be visited by an animal who is believed
to speak to that individual’s soul and life purpose. This animal may even appear in the
individual’s name—either their name given in early childhood, or the adult name they
will take at the conclusion of the quest (Lame Deer & Erdoes, 1994). However, the
dreams and visions that appear to a vision quester during such periods of isolation and
purification should not be regarded as the delirious delusions of an isolated, half-starved,
dehydrated mind—rather, they are considered highly spiritual entities which may only be
accessible to an individual once they are able to drown out the distractions of everyday
life which can overpower the voice of the divine (Lame Deer & Erdoes, 1994). Visions
received through a vision quest delineate the quester’s life purpose as a member of their
society (Ridington & Ridington, 1971).
Healing rituals. While many Native American religious rituals address transitions
in the human life cycle, others seem intended to honor and ensure the flow of life itself.
In many hunting Native American cultures, this role is filled by the shaman, or holy
person. In Native American culture, the shaman is a nomad of sorts who speaks both the
language of the human world and the language of the spirit world (Zimmerman &
Molyneaux, 2000). One of the most important functions of the shaman is to act in the best
interest of his/her people, thereby living a life of spiritual dedication and service.
Subsequently, when there is illness, unrest, hunger, or violence in a village, it is the
shaman’s responsibility to act as the mediator between the human and spirit world, and
divine the cause of trouble (Rasmussen, 2008). The actual ceremonies which the shaman
41
performs also reveal a great deal about the culture from which (s)he originates; for
instance, in the tale of Takankapsaluk (also known as Sedna,) the shaman’s travel
through and about the sea explains the great importance of the sea in the lives of the Inuit
people (Rasmussen, 2008). Finally, by acting as a mediator between the human and spirit
worlds, the shaman is not only able to discover the cause of the misfortune that has
befallen his/her people—(s)he is also able to provide a solution (Zimmerman &
Molyneaux, 2000).
Peyote (mescalito) healing rituals. It has been hypothesized that in some Native
American nations, the shaman does not take the form of an actual human being; rather,
the role of shaman is at times filled by a sacred plant. In parts of the Plains and Southwest
cultural zones of Native America, the sacred plant mescalito, or peyote, is used in Native
American religious rituals (Myerhoff, 1974). The Native American peyote ceremony
blends indigenous Native American spirituality with Christianity, and is generally a
twelve-hour ordeal, beginning around sunset on Saturday, and ending around sunrise on
Sunday. The peyote ritual centers around prayer, the eating of peyote buttons, Bible
study, the singing of peyote songs, water ritual, and contemplation. The peyote itself
generally induces extreme nausea and vomiting, which is followed by euphoria, elevated
consciousness, visions, and communion with the divine (Myerhoff, 1974).
Subsequently, Quanah Parker, Comanche spiritual leader and peyotist, has
famously been credited with the assertion “The white man goes into his church and talks
about Jesus. The Indian goes into his tipi and talks to Jesus” (Martin, 1999). In 1918,
Native American practitioners of the Peyote Religion joined to form the pan-nation
Native American Church, which remains popular with numerous Native American
42
nations today. Though peyote is illegal in most of North America, The Native American
Religious Freedom Acts of 1994 and 1996 protect members of the Native American
Church from prosecution for the use of peyote in religious ceremonies (Zimmerman &
Molyneaux, 2000).
The Sun Dance healing ritual. Still popular and practiced today is the Sun Dance,
a ritual once outlawed by the United States government, and one which also leaves many
non-Native Americans utterly aghast and baffled. For Plains Native Americans such as
the Sioux, the Sun Dance is a highly sacred affair that resonates with spiritual power, and
is considered essential to the survival and revitalization of their people (Twofeathers,
1994). Like any effective ritual, the Sun Dance draws a great deal of its power from the
schism it places between ordinary reality and its own ritual reality. During the four days
of the Sun Dance, the dancers consume neither food nor water. They begin to prepare for
the four-day-long ritual by purifying themselves first in a sweat lodge. The sweat lodge
cleanses both the body and the mind, removing physical impurities through copious
sweating, and any mental or psychic impurities through the transcendentally cleansing
process of placing the body in a physically trying environment (Glucklich, 2001).
Oftentimes, during a successful sweat lodge, participants will receive visions, just as
participants in a successful Sun Dance will receive visions (Twofeathers, 1994).
A sacred Sun Dance tree, often a cottonwood tree, is “hunted,” then “captured” by
the Sun Dancers, and is treated as a sacred captive who has sacrificed its life for the
Plains People. The tree is treated with the utmost respect, placed erect in the Sun Dance
arbor, and usually crowned with an eagle’s nest and buffalo skull. The Sun Dancers will
dance barefoot on hot clay around this tree for four long days—partaking of neither food
43
nor water. On the fourth day, the dancers are pierced with an eagle’s claw, and tethered to
the sacred tree. It is the Sun Dancer’s task to dance him/herself free from the tree. Some
suggest that the tether from the sacred tree to the dancer is an umbilical cord, and that the
dancer will be reborn once (s)he breaks free of the cord (McGaa, 1990).
The ritually-induced physical pain and mortification of the flesh can be
conceptualized as the suffering of one or few for the good of all—similar to the
crucifixion of Jesus Christ in Christianity. Sun Dancers sacrifice their own bodies via
ritual piercing, and thereby generate and dedicate spiritual energy to their tribe, also often
transcending ordinary reality and receiving visions regarding the wellbeing of their
people (Glucklich, 2001). For many Native Americans, the Sun Dance represents a
refusal to kowtow to European-American prejudice and ignorance, and provides a sense
of culture, place, and tradition (McGaa, 1990).
European and American Paganism
Ancient and recent history. Barner-Barry observed, “there is a tendency for
educated people to dismiss the power of myth. This does not mean that they do not have
their own mythologies; it simply means that they are not conscious of their myths,
mistaking them for other types of information, commonly either pure fabrication or
absolute historical truth” (2005). In the European/American Pagan community, there is a
great diversity of myths espoused by contemporary devotees. There are, however, three
overarching, historically oriented myths that are pervasive in the Pagan community, and
form much of the basis for Pagan reactions to instances of persecution, as well as their
fear of future persecution. These myths are those of the Mother Times, the Burning
Times, and the Christian Conversion (Barner-Barry, 2005).
44
For many, it does not matter whether these myths are “true” in the scholarly or
scientific sense—though some devotees adamantly assert that they are. However, if
people believe them to be true and act upon that belief, then the myth becomes true in the
sense that it affects what happens in the real world (Barner-Barry, 2005). Subsequently,
when Pagans are harassed or threatened because of their religious beliefs, “they are
acutely aware that people like them have been punished, tortured, and even killed for
their beliefs in the past. This is reinforced when the person doing the harassing and
making the threats claims to do it on the behalf of Christianity” (Barner-Barry, 2005).
Starhawk emphasized the importance of these myths to the Pagan community when she
wrote, “It is a tragic story that names our condition as one of loss, that gives us a vehicle
through which we can feel our pain, grieve, rage, heal, and fight. Without the story, we
don’t know what’s wrong with us” (1987).
The myth of the Mother Times. The myth of the Mother Times describes the
world as it is thought to have been before the advent of patriarchy and patriarchal
religions. According to this myth, in early human hunting and gathering groups were
matriarchal, matrilineal, and goddess-focused. Women were considered to be making a
vital contribution to society because their gathering of plant foods was central to the
survival of the group, and also because they gave birth to and nurtured children.
However, as warfare became chronic, more and more of the social and political order had
to be adjusted to meet the needs of war. According to the Mother Times myth, this
eventually led to the transition from matriarchy to patriarchy and the rise of religions
based on male gods. In the polytheistic variation of this myth, the female goddesses
became subordinate to the male gods. In the monotheistic version, one transcendent male
45
god became the supreme divinity. In both cases, it is believed that a religious framework
was used to support the patriarchal social and political order that has continued to the
present day (Barner-Barry, 2005).
The myth of the Christian Conversion. The second myth explains how
Christianity spread, particularly in Europe, and the way in which the pre-Christian native
religions were suppressed and their symbols and deities destroyed or incorporated into
Christianity. It is believed that first, Roman legions, and second, Christian missionaries
conquered the “Pagan lands,” or those in Western Europe. During this period, many
Pagan gods and goddesses, as well as Pagan rituals and holy places, were converted into
Christian saints, rituals, and shrines. The horned gods such as Pan and Cernunnos, were
then associated with Satan (Barner-Barry, 2005).
Based upon this myth, a series of principles arise surrounding the relationship
between Pagans and Christians. These principles suggest first, that Pagans are tolerant of
other religious traditions, while Christians are seen as intolerant. Second, they note that
Pagans do not proselytize, while Christians proselytize vigorously and persistently. Third,
the myth suggests that Pagans are basically peaceful, and use violence only in defense
and then reluctantly; whereas Christians have no compunctions about using violence to
convert or punish non-Christians. Finally, while the Christian Conversion myth also
asserts that while Pagans see the virtue of having many gods and goddesses and ways of
worshipping them, Christians are determined to stamp out any worship that is not their
own monotheism (Barner-Barry, 2005).
The myth of the Burning Times. The third major myth that informs the Pagan
worldview is that of the Burning Times, or a period in European (and American) history
46
that lasted from approximately the mid-fifteenth to the early eighteenth centuries. The
Burning Times refers to the purposes, actions, and effects of the Inquisition in Europe.
This period is seen as a time of intense witch hunting and executions—usually by fire,
but sometimes by hanging. The Burning Times myth suggests that the major purpose of
the Inquisition was to eliminate those who held power and status in local communities
(primarily women including the midwives, herbalists, and wise women) by accusing
them of witchcraft and burning them. It is believed that this elimination of competitors
allowed the Christian church fathers to consolidate their patriarchal power over society
(Barner-Barry, 2005).
Cosmology and conceptualization of divinity. Many Pagans consider their
beliefs to be a revival or reemergence of an ancient nature religion, which is perceived as
“the most ancient of religions, in which the earth was worshipped as a woman under
different names and guises throughout the inhabited world” (Barner-Barry, 2005).
Paganism generally conceptualizes the divine in both feminine and masculine terms, and
considers both divine and human feminine characteristics and principles to be at least as
important as masculine characteristics and principles. Pagans differ from followers of
more mainstream religions in that they generally conceptualize divinity in a duotheistic
(belief in two deities), polytheistic (belief in many deities), or henotheistic (belief in one
deity among many), rather than monotheistic manner. Moreover, Pagans have no
supernatural being in their pantheon of deities who resembles the devil or Satan figure
found in Christianity and Islam (Robinson, 2009).
In the center of most contemporary Pagan cosmologies is some concept of the
Goddess as central or primary to all that is considered sacred. The Goddess is often
47
closely associated with the earth or with the totality of nature, and often takes on three
aspects, most commonly those of maiden, mother, and crone (old wise woman). Many
Pagans also associate these aspects with the waxing, full, and waning moons. The maiden
and the waxing moon are usually associated with birth and youth; the mother and the full
moon are associated with maturity and nurturance; and the crone and waning moon are
associated with old age (usually connoting wisdom) and death (Barner-Barry, 2005). If
the divine is conceptualized as nature or the earth itself, as is the case in
European/American Paganism, individuals tend to approach the earth more respectfully,
since they are interacting with something that is inherently sacred. This differs sharply
from the traditional monotheistic conceptualizations of divinity, wherein the divine is
considered transcendent, rather than immanent (Barner-Barry, 2005). Barner-Barry also
keenly observes, “if you believe a deity presides over the earth from ‘above’ and gives
humans the duty of controlling and exploiting the earth primarily for human welfare, it is
much easier to adopt public policies that damage or destroy parts of the earth and its
nonhuman living creatures” (2005).
Additionally, most contemporary Pagans consider the God to be the consort of the
Goddess, and to represent the masculine principle of divinity. The God is often associated
with the sun, green growing things, and the hunt. “He is ritually reborn every Yule
(winter solstice), couples with the Goddess at Beltane (May 1) to bring fertility to the
world and dies to be reborn at the next winter solstice” (Barner-Barry, 2005). Depending
upon the particular Pagan tradition, the God plays a greater or lesser role. In some
feminist and/or Dianic traditions, he plays almost no role at all (Barner-Barry, 2005). The
centrality of the Goddess in Pagan traditions, however, does not necessarily equate to
48
monotheism. While acknowledging the central role of the Goddess, most contemporary
Pagans also worship and work with a number of sacred, spiritual beings, including a
corresponding consort God or any one of a variety of more specific ancient pagan gods
and goddesses derived from a host of traditions. Some Pagans may also work with
“spirits of the land,” such as faeries and spiritual beings (Barner-Barry, 2005).
Conceptualization of afterlife. Though devotees of earth- centered practices
vary greatly in their beliefs regarding death and the afterlife, most possess some view
which departs markedly from the beliefs of Christianity, Judaism, and Islam. Some
practitioners believe in ancient legends of a “Summerland” where people’s spirits go after
death, and can reflect upon their previous lives on earth before they are reincarnated into
the body of a newborn infant. Some of these individuals also believe that after living
enough varied lives, one has learned enough to go on to another level of existence about
which we know nothing. Others believe that the influences people have upon their
children, friends, and society as a whole will continue to influence posterity, and
therefore, those who have passed experience a “life after death.” Still others believe that
the literal molecules that comprise the human body will be incorporated into other living
entities, similarly resulting in a more figurative afterlife (Robinson, 2004).
Ethics and values.
Reverence for the earth. Paganism places a strong emphasis upon preservation of
and reverence for the environment. In the Pagan worldview, all living things (including
humans, animals, plants, rocks, stars, and planets) are revered, and may also be regarded
as having a spirit. Most Pagans honor the passage of the seasons, and may view the
solstices, equinoxes, full and new moons as holy days. Additionally, Pagans usually
49
attempt to meet and hold religious rites out of doors whenever possible. Overall, Pagans
tend to express reverence for the earth through a great deal of concern for the
environment, and in some cases, the performance of religious ceremonies or rituals to
bring harmony and healing to nature (Robinson, 2009, & 2004).
Gender equality. Paganism also differs from majority religious practices as it
endorses and propounds an equality of the genders. The Pagan worldview conceptualizes
nature as exhibiting polar masculine and feminine characteristics—each of which are
integral and honored components of the other. For example, in the Pagan worldview, the
earth is often conceptualized as feminine, while the sky and rain are conceptualized as
masculine. Humanity needs both the earth in which to plant vegetation, and the
precipitation to nourish it. Thus, at a very basic level, both feminine and masculine
principles are necessary for survival, and therefore honored. Subsequently, this reverence
for masculine and feminine principles in nature frequently translates to a reverence for
men and women; male and female traits and characteristics (Robinson, 2004). Finally,
though there are no firmly reliable figures on the Pagan movement as a whole,
fragmentary evidence suggests that contemporary Pagans are as likely to be men as
women, though women may predominate (Barner-Barry, 2005)
Independence and freedom. Most researchers who have worked with or
individuals who know Pagan individuals can attest that they tend to be highly
individualistic and independent people. Pagans who were not born into their faith know
that they have chosen an unusual, potentially dangerous, religious path. This spiritual
path is not the way of conformity. In fact, many Pagans tend to be proudly and adamantly
nonconformist, “resisting anything they consider undue influence from inside, as well as
50
outside, the Pagan movement” (Barner-Barry, 2005). Subsequently, though there has
been more emphasis in recent decades upon the Pagan community as a growing, living
“tribe,” the Pagan worldview can be conceptualized through the statement I am, therefore
we are.
Sects and terms. The term “pagan” literally means “country dweller,” and harks
back to the time wherein practitioners of Paganism were primarily rural, agrarian peoples.
For the purposes of this text, Pagan refers to individuals who identify with some form of
pantheistic, earth-centered European/American Paganism, and do not feel that their
identity is better described by the terms Neopagan, Wiccan, Witch, Druid, heathen, or
Asatru. The term Neopagan reflects the fact that most modern-day practitioners of
Paganism are reconstructing extinct or nearly extinct ancient forms of Paganism, and that
these new constructions are inherently different from their ancestral ones. The term
Wiccan refers to a devotee of Wicca, which is a specific type of modern Neopaganism,
generally involving some form of goddess worship, polytheism, and magick. The term
Witch refers to an individual who practices witchcraft, or magick, which is often more
“practice” and “action”-oriented than other forms of Paganism. The term heathen literally
means “one who lives upon the heath,” and generally refers to an individual who
practices some form of Germanic Neopaganism. Similar to heathens are Asatrus, who are
generally individuals who practice some form of Norse or Icelandic Neopaganism. In
contrast, Druids are practitioners of earth-centered faith who honor the principles of the
Singer, or the creative being, the Shaman, or the one who communes deeply with nature
and other worlds, and the Sage, or the student of wisdom (Berger, 1999; Robinson, 2004;
& Robinson, 2009).
51
Rituals.
Common ritual ceremonies and tools. Most Pagans consider the solstices,
equinoxes, full and new moons to be holy days. On these holy days or holidays, devotees
may hold ceremonies alone or with other devotees, and utilize particular ritual tools or
objects. The Pagan worldview places an emphasis upon the four cardinal directions of
north, east, south, and west, and assigns an “element” to each of these directions—
including earth, air, fire, and water, respectively. Ritual tools such as candles, incense, a
bowl of salt or earth, a double-sided ritual knife, and a cauldron or chalice are commonly
used to represent these directions and elements.
52
Methods
Participants
Participants were male and female practitioners of earth religion, ages 18 and
older. Participants were solicited through online communities and gathering places for
practitioners of Yoruban and Dahomey diaspora faiths, Native American spirituality, and
European/American Paganism.
Participants who endorsed practicing Yoruban African diaspora faith were
provided with the options of identifying as (a) santero/a, brujo/a, babalorisha/iyalorisha,
babalawo, aleyeo, mae-de-santo/pais-de-santo, ialorixá/babalorixá, candomblezeiro,
iyawo, oga/ekeji, or as someone whose spiritual path was not mentioned. Participants
who endorsed practicing Dahomey African diaspora faith were provided with the options
of identifying as (a) vodouisant, mambo/houngan, hounsi, or as someone whose spiritual
path was not mentioned. Participants who endorsed practicing Native American
spirituality were provided with the options of identifying as (a) medicine (wo)man,
shaman, practitioner of traditional Native American spirituality, or as someone whose
spiritual path was not mentioned. Participants who endorsed practicing
European/American Paganism were provided with the options of identifying as (a) Pagan,
Neopagan, Wiccan, Witch, Druid, heathen, Asatru, or as someone whose spiritual path
was not mentioned. Participants who endorsed practicing a different earth or nature
religion were provided with the options of identifying as (a) ecospiritualist, hoodoo
53
practitioner, initiate/devotee of another earth/nature religion, or as someone whose
spiritual path was not mentioned. If an individual indicated that (s)he did not practice
earth religion, the survey closed and the respondent was thanked for their participation.
All participants were volunteers, and were not compensated for their participation.
Participants were informed that the purpose of the study was to investigate the experience
of minority religious clients when seeking mental health services.
Materials
All participants were provided with an electronic consent form. Upon completion
of the consent form, participants were administered an electronic questionnaire with
open-ended, multiple choice, and Likert-type (1 = Strongly disagree, 3= Neutral, 5=
Strongly agree) items. The questionnaire sought to illuminate the influence of minority
religious beliefs on service-seeking, the satisfaction of minority religious clients with
mental health services, and minority religious client perception of therapist’s cultural
competence. Additionally, the National Council of Schools and Programs in Professional
Psychology’s Developmental Achievement Levels were consulted in the item
construction process. Finally, the questionnaire was also reviewed by peers within the
field for clarity, coherence, objectivity, and its ability to measure the desired constructs.
For a copy of the questionnaire, see Appendix A.
Procedures
Each participant completed an electronic consent form that stated the purpose of
the study, participants’ rights, and the fact that the Institutional Review Board had
approved the study. After completing the questions, participants were thanked for their
participation.
54
Results
Results from both quantitative and qualitative analyses of participant-provided
data are presented below. Two branches of contemporary earth religion
(European/American Paganism and African diaspora faith) had large enough sample sizes
to run statistical analyses, however, two (traditional Native American spirituality and
other earth/nature religions) did not have large enough sample sizes to perform statistical
analyses. Statistical analyses of the European/American Pagan (E/AP) and African
diaspora faith (ADF) groups are presented along with all participants’ qualitative and
quantitative responses.
First, information pertaining to the number of participants who completed the
questionnaire, the demographics of those participants, and the participants’ inherited
religiosity, or the religion practiced by their family of origin is detailed in this section.
Next, data pertaining to the salience of specific diversity variables to participants’
identities, participants’ indigenous ways of understanding distress that interferes with
daily functioning, as well as participants’ indigenous ways of coping with distress that
interferes with daily functioning is also detailed in this section. Finally, data pertaining to
participants’ ability to access mental health services, their belief in the helpfulness of
mental health services, their fear of religious discrimination when accessing mental
health services and the impact of that fear, as well as other topics specifically related to
this religious population’s experience of mental health services are discussed. Within
each subheading, results are organized in order of largest group to smallest group.
55
Total Number of Participants
Sixty-four participants completed the researcher’s questionnaire (n = 64).
Number of Participants from Each Type of Earth-Centered Faith
This section describes the religious makeup of respondents based upon their selfidentified labels, while the next describes the respondents based upon researcheridentified labels. 45.3% of respondents (n = 29) self-identified as practitioners of
Paganism or Neopaganism. 18.8% of respondents (n = 12) self-identified as practitioners
of Vodou. Another 17.2% of respondents (n = 11) self-identified as practitioners of
Santería, Lucumi, or Ifa. 14.1% of respondents (n = 9) self-identified as practitioners of
traditional aboriginal or Native American spirituality, while another 14.1% of
respondents (n = 9) self-identified as practitioners of another earth/nature religion.
Finally, 3.1% of respondents (n = 2) self-identified as practitioners of Candomblé or
Umbanda (see Table 1 and Figure 1).
Table 1
Frequency and Percentage of Respondents from Each Type of Earth Centered Faith
________________________________________________________________________
Type of Faith
n=
%=
________________________________________________________________________
Paganism/Neopaganism
29
45.3%
Vodou
12
18.8%
Santería/Lucumi/Ifa
11
17.2%
Traditional aboriginal or Native American
9
14.1%
Other earth/nature religion
9
14.1%
Candomblé/Umbanda
2
3.1%
________________________________________________________________________
56
Number of Participants from Each Researcher-Identified Categories of EarthCentered Faith
Researcher identified terms include European/American Paganism (E/AP),
Yoruban African diaspora faith, Dahomey African diaspora faith, traditional aboriginal or
Native American spirituality (TNAS), and other earth or nature religions (OE/NR). In
some sections of the results, Yoruban African diaspora faith and Dahomey African
diaspora faith samples are combined for statistical analysis purposes, and referred to as
African diaspora faith (ADF).
45.3% (n = 29) of respondents endorsed practicing European/American Paganism,
20.3% (n = 13) of respondents endorsed practicing Yoruban African diaspora faith, and
18.8% (n = 12) of respondents endorsed practicing Dahomey African diaspora faith.
14.1% (n = 9) of respondents endorsed practicing traditional aboriginal or Native
American spirituality, and 14.1% (n = 9) of respondents endorsed practicing other earth
or nature religions.
Table 2
Frequency and Percentage of Respondents from Researcher-Identified Categories of
Earth Centered Faith
_______________________________________________________________________
Categories of Faith
n=
%=
________________________________________________________________________
European/American Paganism
29
45.3%
Yoruban African diaspora faith
13
20.3%
Dahomey African diaspora faith
12
18.8%
Traditional aboriginal or Native American faith
9
14.1%
Other earth/nature religions
9
14.1%
________________________________________________________________________
57
European/American Paganism
Of the sample who identified as Pagan or Neopagan, 30.8% identified as Wiccan
(n = 8), and 26.9% of those 22 respondents identified as Pagan (n = 7). 19.2% of the
Pagan/Neopagan sample identified as Witches (n = 5), while 7.7% identified as Druids (n
= 2). 7.7% (n = 2) also indicated that their spiritual path was not mentioned, and that they
identified as Slavic/Baltic Romuva, and as a ceremonial magician and occultist. Finally,
3.8% of this population identified as Neopagan (n = 1), while another 3.8% identified as
heathen (n = 1). (See Table 3 and Figure 2).
Table 3
Frequency and Percentage of Respondent Sects of European/American Paganism
________________________________________________________________________
Sects of Paganism
n=
%=
________________________________________________________________________
Wicca
8
30.8%
Paganism
7
26.9%
Witchcraft
5
19.2%
Druidism
2
7.7%
Ceremonial magic/occult
1
3.8%
Heathenism
1
3.8%
Neopaganism
1
3.8%
Slavic/Baltic Romuva
1
3.8%
________________________________________________________________________
Yoruban African diaspora religion
Of the sample who endorsed practicing Yoruban African diaspora religion, 11
(84.6% of this group) identified as practitioners of Santería, Lucumi, or Ifa. Of the
Santería, Lucumi, and Ifa subset, 40% identified as aleyos. Another 30% of the subset
identified as santeros/as while another 20% identified as babalorishas/iyalorishas. Finally,
10% of this sample identified as brujos/as (See Figure 3). Of the total sample who
58
endorsed practicing Yoruban African diaspora religion, 2 of this group identified as
practitioners of Candomblé or Umbanda. One described her/himself as a babalawo, while
the other described her/himself as an aleyo (see Tables 4, 5, and 6, as well as Figure 4).
Table 4
Frequency and Percentage of Respondent Sects of Yoruban African Diaspora Religion
________________________________________________________________________
Sects of Yoruban African Diaspora Faith
n=
%=
________________________________________________________________________
Santería/Lucumi/Ifa
11
84.6%
Candomblé or Umbanda
2
15.38%
________________________________________________________________________
Table 5
Frequency and Percentage of Respondent Santerían/Lucumi/Ifa Religious Paths
________________________________________________________________________
Santerían/Lucumi/Ifa Religious Paths
n=
%=
________________________________________________________________________
Aleyo
4
40%
Santero/a
3
30%
Babalorisha/iyalorisha
3
20%
Brujo/a
1
10%
________________________________________________________________________
Table 6
Frequency and Percentage of Respondent Candombleizero/Umbandan Religious Paths
________________________________________________________________________
Candombleizero/Umbandan Religious Paths
n=
%=
________________________________________________________________________
Aleyo
1
50%
Babalawo
1
50%
________________________________________________________________________
Dahomey African diaspora religion
Of the respondents who identified as practitioners of Vodou, 44.4% (n = 4)
identified as mambos or houngans. Another 33.3% (n = 3) identified as hounsis, and the
final 22.2% (n = 2) identified as vodouisants (see Table 7 and Figure 5).
59
Table 7
Frequency and Percentage of Respondent Dahomey African Diaspora (Vodou) Religious
Paths
________________________________________________________________________
Vodouisant Religious Paths
n=
%=
________________________________________________________________________
Mambo/houngan
4
44.4%
Hounsi
3
33.3%
Vodouisant
2
22.2%
________________________________________________________________________
Aboriginal and Native American spirituality
Of the respondents who identified as practitioners of traditional aboriginal or
Native American spirituality, 55.6% identified as shamans (n = 5), and 33.3% (n = 3)
identified as practitioners of traditional Native American spirituality. Finally, 11.1%
identified as medicine women or men (n = 1) (see Table 8 and Figure 6).
Table 8
Frequency and Percentage of Respondent Aboriginal and Native American Religious
Paths
________________________________________________________________________
Aboriginal/Native American Religious Paths
n=
%=
________________________________________________________________________
Shaman
5
55.6%
Practitioner of aboriginal/Native American faith
3
33.3%
Medicine (wo)man
1
11.1%
________________________________________________________________________
Other earth and nature religions
Of the respondents who identified as practitioners of another earth/nature religion,
57.1% identified as devotees of eclectic earth-centered faith (n = 4). 42.9% of the sample
(n = 3) indicated that their spiritual path was not mentioned, 1 of whom identified as a
pantheist, 1 of whom identified as a shaman with a background in Wicca, and 1 of whom
identified as a parapsychologist (see Table 9 and Figure 7).
60
Table 9
Frequency and Percentage of Respondent Other Earth and Nature Religious Paths
________________________________________________________________________
Other Earth and Nature Religious Paths
n=
%=
________________________________________________________________________
Eclectic earth faith
4
57.1%
Pantheism
1
14.29%
Parapsychology
1
14.29%
Wicca-informed shamanism
1
14.29%
________________________________________________________________________
Participant Demographics and Diversity Variables
Respondent age and gender. Respondent ages ranged from 18 to 70, with a
mean age of 41.3, and a median age of 42. 60.9% of respondents identified as women (n
= 39), and 34.4% of respondents identified as men (n = 22). 3.1% of respondents
identified as gender queer or androgynous (n = 2), and 1.6% (n = 1) identified as
transgender (female to male transgender). (See Table 10 and Figure 8).
Table 10
Frequency and Percentage of Respondent Gender Identity
________________________________________________________________________
Respondent Gender Identity
n=
%=
________________________________________________________________________
Woman
39
60.9%
Man
22
34.4%
Gender queer/androgynous
2
3.1%
FTM transgender
1
1.6%
________________________________________________________________________
Respondent race, ethnicity, and ancestral heritage. Approximately half of the
total sample (48.4%, n = 31) identified as white/of European descent only. However, 9
respondents (14.1% of total sample) who identified as bi or multiracial cited white or
European heritage, and 7 more respondents (11% of total sample) identified with another
61
racial or ethnic label, but also cited European heritage. Subsequently, 73.4% (n = 47) of
the total sample cited some white or European heritage.
Table 11
Frequency and Percentage of Respondents with White Heritage
________________________________________________________________________
Respondent European/White Heritage
n=
%=
________________________________________________________________________
White/European heritage only
31
48.4%
White/European and one or more other heritages
16
25%
Total sample with White/European heritage
47
73.4%
________________________________________________________________________
Of the respondents who identified some European ancestry, 27.26% (n = 13)
claimed Irish heritage, while another 23.4% of respondents (n = 11) cited Scottish
heritage. 23.4% (n = 11) claimed German heritage, while another 19.1% (n = 9) of
respondents cited English heritage. 10.6% of respondents (n = 5) cited Italian heritage,
another 10.6% (n = 5) cited Polish heritage, and 8.5% % (n = 4) cited French heritage.
6.4% of respondents (n = 3) claimed Swedish heritage, and another 6.4% (n = 3) claimed
Welsh heritage. 4.3% of the total sample (n = 2) cited Lithuanian heritage, 4.3% cited
Russian heritage (n = 2), and another 4.3% claimed Swiss heritage (n = 2). Finally,
Byelorussian (n = 1), Canadian (n = 1), Czechoslovakian (n = 1), Dutch (n = 1), Finnish
(n = 1), Greek (n = 1), Hungarian (n = 1), Norwegian (n = 1), Portuguese (n = 1),
Romanian (n = 1), Saxon (n = 1), Scandinavian (n = 1), Ukrainian (n = 1), and Vlachi
(Slovakian Roma) (n = 1) heritage each respectively comprised another 2.1% of
respondent heritage.
62
Table 12
Frequency and Percentage of White, Biracial, Multiracial, and Latino Respondents’
Ancestral White/European Heritage
________________________________________________________________________
Ancestral European/White Heritage of Respondents
n=
%=
________________________________________________________________________
Irish
13
27.26%
Scottish
11
23.4%
German
11
23.4%
English
9
19.1%
Italian
5
10.6%
Polish
5
10.6%
French
4
8.5%
Swedish
3
6.4%
Welsh
3
6.4%
Lithuanian
2
4.3%
Russian
2
4.3%
Swiss
2
4.3%
Byelorussian
1
2.1%
Canadian
1
2.1%
Czechoslovakian
1
2.1%
Dutch
1
2.1%
Finnish
1
2.1%
Greek
1
2.1%
Hungarian
1
2.1%
Norwegian
1
2.1%
Portuguese
1
2.1%
Romanian
1
2.1%
Saxon
1
2.1%
Scandinavian
1
2.1%
Ukranian
1
2.1%
Vlachi
1
2.1%
________________________________________________________________________
22% of the total sample of respondents (n = 14) identified as black/of African
descent. 50% of this sample (n = 7) identified as black/of African descent only, while
28.6% (n = 4) identified as biracial with some black/African heritage, and 21.43% (n = 3)
identified as multiracial with some black/African heritage. Respondents cited Brazilian (n
= 1, 7.1% of sample), Congolese (n = 1, 7.1% of sample), Jamaican (n = 1, 7.1% of
63
sample), Puerto Rican (n = 1, 7.1% of sample), and Trinidadian (n = 1, 7.1% of sample)
heritage.
Table 13
Frequency and Percentage of Respondents with Black/African Heritage
________________________________________________________________________
Respondent Black/African Heritage
n=
%=
________________________________________________________________________
Black/African heritage only
7
50%
Black/African and one or more other heritages
7
50%
Total sample with Black/African heritage
14
21.9%
________________________________________________________________________
Table 14
Frequency and Percentage of Black/African/African-American Respondents’ Ancestral
Black/African Heritage
________________________________________________________________________
Ancestral Black/African Heritage of Respondents
n=
%=
________________________________________________________________________
Brazilian
1
7.1%
Congolese
1
7.1%
Jamaican
1
7.1%
Puerto Rican
1
7.1%
Trinidadian
1
7.1%
________________________________________________________________________
14.1% of all respondents (n = 9) identified as aboriginal or Native American,
while 22.2% (n = 2) of this subset identified as aboriginal or Native American only.
44.4% of those who cited aboriginal heritage along with other heritage identified as
biracial (n = 4), and cited aboriginal and white/European heritage (n = 3) and aboriginal
and black/African heritage (n = 1). Another 33.3% (n = 3) of this group identified as
multiracial, and cited aboriginal, white/European, and black/African heritage (n = 2) and
aboriginal, Latino, and white/European heritage (n = 1). Tribal heritage among this group
included Cherokee (22.2%, n = 2), Apache, Arawak, Cayuga, Mohawk, Shoshone, and
64
Taino (11.1%, n = 1 respectively). Tribal heritage also included First 6 Nations Canada,
and indigenous Georgian, Mexican, and South Carolinian (11.1%, n = 1 respectively).
Table 15
Frequency and Percentage of Respondents with Aboriginal/Native American Heritage
________________________________________________________________________
Respondent Aboriginal/Native American Heritage
n=
%=
________________________________________________________________________
Aboriginal/Native American heritage only
2
22.2%
Aboriginal/Native American and one or more other heritages
7
77.7%
Total sample with Aboriginal/Native American heritage
9
14.1%
________________________________________________________________________
Table 16
Frequency and Percentage of Aboriginal/Native American Respondents’ Ancestral
Aboriginal/Native American Heritage
________________________________________________________________________
Ancestral Aboriginal Heritage/Tribe(s) of Respondents
n=
%=
________________________________________________________________________
Cherokee
2
22.2%
Apache
1
11.1%
Arawak
1
11.1%
Cayuga
1
11.1%
Mohawk
1
11.1%
Shoshone
1
11.1%
Taino
1
11.1%
First 6 Nations Canadian
1
11.1%
Indigenous Georgian
1
11.1%
Indigenous Mexican
1
11.1%
Indigenous South Carolinan
1
11.1%
________________________________________________________________________
10.9% of respondents (n = 7) identified as Latino, while 42.9% (n = 3) of this
subset identified as Latino only. 28.6% of this subset cited Latino heritage as well as one
other heritage, and identified as biracial (Latino and black: n = 1, Latino and white: n =
1). Another 28.6% of this subset cited Latino heritage as well as 2 or more other
heritages, and identified as multiracial (Latino, white, and black: n = 1, Latino,
aboriginal, and white: n = 1). 28.6% of respondents that identified as Latino cited
65
Mexican heritage (n = 2), while another 28.6% cited Cuban-American heritage (n = 2).
Other heritages cited included Cuban, Mexican-American, and Venezuelan (14.3%, n =
1, respectively).
Table 17
Frequency and Percentage of Respondents with Latino Heritage
________________________________________________________________________
Respondent Latino American Heritage
n=
%=
________________________________________________________________________
Latino heritage only
3
42.9%
Latino and one or more other heritages
4
57.14%
Total sample with Latino heritage
9
10.9%
________________________________________________________________________
Table 18
Frequency and Percentage of Latino Respondents’ Ancestral Latino Heritage
________________________________________________________________________
Ancestral Latino Heritage of Respondents
n=
%=
________________________________________________________________________
Cuban-American
2
28.6%
Mexican
2
28.6%
Cuban
1
14.3%
Mexican-American
1
14.3%
Venezuelan
1
14.3%
________________________________________________________________________
10.9% of the total sample (n = 7) identified as biracial. Of this 10.9% biracial
sample, 42.9% (n = 3) identified as white and aboriginal. The remainder of this subset
identified as Latino and aboriginal, Latino and black, or Latino and white (14.3%, n = 1,
respectively). Moreover, 9.4% of respondents (n = 6) identified as multiracial. Of this
9.4% sample, 33.3% (n = 2) identified as aboriginal, black, and white, while another
33.3% (n = 2) identified as aboriginal, Latino, and white. The remainder of this subset
identified as black, Latino, and white; or as Latino only (16.6%, n = 1, respectively).One
individual identified as multiracial, but did not specify her/his racial and ethnic heritage
(16.6%, n = 1).
66
Table 19
Frequency and Percentage of Biracial and Multiracial Respondents
________________________________________________________________________
Respondent Racial Heritage
n=
%=
________________________________________________________________________
Biracial
7
10.9%
Multiracial
6
9.4%
________________________________________________________________________
Table 20
Frequency and Percentage of Biracial and Multiracial Respondents Ancestral Heritage
________________________________________________________________________
Ancestral Heritage of Biracial/Multiracial Respondents
n=
%=
________________________________________________________________________
Biracial
6
9.4%
________________________________________________________________________
White and aboriginal
3
42.9%
Latino and aboriginal
1
14.3%
Latino and black
1
14.3%
Latino and white
1
14.3%
________________________________________________________________________
Multiracial
6
9.4%
________________________________________________________________________
Aboriginal, black, and white
2
33.3%
Aboriginal, Latino, and white
2
33.3%
Black, Latino, and white
1
16.6%
Latino only
1
16.6%
________________________________________________________________________
Finally, 1 respondent (2.2% of total sample) indicated that her/his race/ethnicity
was not mentioned, and that (s)he identified as racially Jewish.
Respondent race/ethnicity by religion. As many earth-centered faiths tend to
differ from one another based upon not only specific beliefs, but also by devotee racial
and ethnic background, respondent race and ethnicity is presented in this section based
upon religious path. The majority of European/American Pagans (E/APs) identified as
white/of European descent (n = 30, 93.8% of Pagan sample). The minority of E/APs
identified as aboriginal/indigenous, black/of African descent, Latino/Hispanic, and/or
67
biracial (n = 2, 6.3% of Pagan sample, respectively). Finally, one E/AP identified as
multiracial (n = 1, 3.1% of Pagan sample).
Table 21
Frequency and Percentage of European/American Pagans’ Racial/Ethnic Identity
________________________________________________________________________
E/AP Racial Identity
n=
%=
________________________________________________________________________
White/of European descent
30
93.8%
Aboriginal/Indigenous
2
6.3%
Black/of African descent
2
6.3%
Latino/Hispanic
2
6.3%
Biracial
2
6.3%
Multiracial
1
3.1%
Total E/AP sample
32
50%
________________________________________________________________________
The majority of African diaspora faith (ADF) devotees identified as black/of
African descent (n = 11, 47.8% of ADF sample). The next largest group identified as
white/of European descent (n = 9, 39.1% of ADF sample). The third largest group of
ADF devotees identified as Latino/Hispanic (n = 6, 26.1%). The next largest group of
ADF devotees identified as aboriginal/indigenous and/or multiracial (n = 5, 21.7% of
African diaspora sample). Finally, 4 devotees of African diaspora faith identified as
biracial (n = 4, 17.4% of ADF sample).
Table 22
Frequency and Percentage of African Diaspora Faith Devotees’ Racial/Ethnic Identity
________________________________________________________________________
ADF Devotees’ Racial Identity
n=
%=
________________________________________________________________________
Black/of African descent
11
47.8%
White/of European descent
9
39.1%
Latino/Hispanic
6
26.1%
Aboriginal/Indigenous
5
21.7%
Multiracial
5
21.7%
Biracial
4
17.4%
Total ADF sample
23
36%
68
________________________________________________________________________
The majority of devotees of traditional Native American spirituality (TNAS)
identified as white/of European descent (n = 8, 88.9% of TNAS sample). The next largest
group of devotees of TNAS identified as aboriginal/indigenous (n = 4, 44.4% of TNAS
sample). Finally, three devotees of TNAS identified as biracial (n = 3, 14.1% of TNAS
sample).
Table 23
Frequency and Percentage of Traditional Native American Spirituality Devotees’
Racial/Ethnic Identity
________________________________________________________________________
TNAS Devotees’ Racial Identity
n=
%=
________________________________________________________________________
White/of European descent
8
88.9%
Aboriginal/Indigenous
4
44.4%
Biracial
3
33.3%
Total TNAS sample
9
14.1%
________________________________________________________________________
The majority of devotees of other earth/nature religions (OE/NRs) identified as
white/of European descent (n = 7, 77.8% of OE/NRs sample). The minority of devotees
of OE/NRs identified as black/of African descent (n = 2, 22.2% of OE/NRs sample),
and/or multiracial (n = 1, 11.1% of OE/NRs sample).
Table 24
Frequency and Percentage of Other Earth/Nature Religion Devotees’ Racial/Ethnic
Identity
________________________________________________________________________
Respondent Racial Identity
n=
%=
________________________________________________________________________
White/of European descent
7
77.8%
Black/of African descent
2
22.2%
Multiracial
1
11.1%
Total other earth/nature religion sample
9
14.1%
________________________________________________________________________
69
Respondent socioeconomic status. The majority of respondents (50.8%, n = 32)
identified socioeconomically as middle class. The next most prevalent socioeconomic
statuses were lower middle class and upper middle class, characterizing 22.2% (n = 14)
and 19% (n = 12) of respondents respectively. Finally, 6.3% of respondents (n = 4)
socioeconomically identified as lower class, while 1.6% (n = 1) identified as upper class
(see Table 25 and Figure 9).
Table 25
Frequency and Percentage of Respondent Socioeconomic Status
________________________________________________________________________
Respondent Socioeconomic Status
n=
%=
________________________________________________________________________
Middle class
32
50.8%
Lower middle class
14
22.2%
Upper middle class
12
19%
Lower class
4
6.3%
Upper class
1
1.6%
________________________________________________________________________
Respondent disability status. 17.5% of respondents (n = 11) indicated that they
have a disability, while 82.5% (n = 52) identified as able-bodied (see Figure 10). Of the
17.5% who indicated that they have a disability, 36.4% (n = 4) indicated that their
disability is congenital, while another 63.6% (n = 7) indicated that their disability is
acquired (see Tables 26, 27 and Figure 11).
Table 26
Frequency and Percentage of Respondent Disability Status
________________________________________________________________________
Respondent Disability Status
n=
%=
________________________________________________________________________
Have a disability
11
17.5%
Do not have a disability
52
82.5%
________________________________________________________________________
70
Table 27
Frequency and Percentage of Disability Types
________________________________________________________________________
Respondent Disability Type
n=
%=
________________________________________________________________________
Have a congenital disability
11
17.5%
Have an acquired disability
7
63.6%
________________________________________________________________________
Respondent sexual orientation. 58.7% of respondents (n = 37) identified as
heterosexual. 12.7% identified as bisexual (n = 8), and another 9.5% identified as gay (n
= 6). 6.3% of respondents (n = 4) identified as lesbian, 4.8% of respondents (n = 3)
identified as omni/pansexual, and another 4.8% of respondents (n = 3) indicated that their
sexual orientation was not mentioned. Of these 3, 1 identified as questioning, another
identified as bicurious, and the last stated that (s)he is not attracted to cisgendered men.
Finally, 3.2% of respondents (n = 2) identified as asexual (see Table 28 and Figure 12).
Table 28
Frequency and Percentage of Respondent Sexual Orientation
________________________________________________________________________
Respondent Sexual Orientation
n=
%=
________________________________________________________________________
Heterosexual
37
58.7%
Bisexual
8
12.7%
Gay
6
9.5%
Lesbian
4
6.3%
Omni/pansexual
3
4.8%
Asexual
2
3.2%
Questioning
1
1.6%
Bicurious
1
1.6%
Attracted to partners other than cisgendered men
1
1.6%
________________________________________________________________________
71
Respondent inherited religiosity. Interestingly, only 6.25% of respondents (n =
4) indicated that they were raised in a family that practiced earth religion, while 93.75%
of respondents (n = 60) indicated that they were raised in a family that did not practice
earth religion. Of the individuals who were raised in earth religious homes, 2 originated
from families that practiced Lucumi (3.1% of total sample), 1 grew up in a family that
practiced heathenism (1.6% of total sample), while the other was raised in a family that
practices Palo Mayombe (1.6% of total sample) (see Table 29 and Figure 13).
Table 29
Frequency and Percentage of Respondent Inherited Religiosity: Basic
________________________________________________________________________
Respondent Inherited Religiosity
n=
%=
________________________________________________________________________
Raised in earth religious homes
4
6.25%
Not raised in earth religious homes
60
93.75%
________________________________________________________________________
Of the respondents who were not raised in earth religious homes, the majority
indicated that they were raised Catholic (39.1% of total sample, n = 25). 10.9% of total
respondents disclosed being raised in a non-denominational Christian home (n = 7), while
9.4% of respondents (n = 6) stated that they were raised Methodist Christian. Another
7.8% of respondents (n = 5) indicated that they were not raised in any particular religious
tradition, while 6.25% of respondents (n = 4) indicated that they were raised Baptist
Christian. An additional 6.25% of respondents (n = 4) disclosed growing up in a
Protestant Christian family. 3.12% of respondents (n = 2) stated that they were raised in
agnostic homes, and an additional 3.12% of respondents (n = 2) described being raised
Presbyterian Christian. Finally, other faiths practiced in the homes of respondents
included Eastern Orthodox Christianity, fundamentalist Christianity, Greek Orthodox
72
Christianity, Judaism, Lutheran Christianity, Neo-Christianity, Seventh Day Adventist
Christianity, and Southern Baptist/Evangelical Christianity (1.6%, n = 1 for each
religious tradition).
Table 30
Frequency and Percentage of Respondent Inherited Religiosity: Detailed
________________________________________________________________________
Religion practiced by respondents’ family of origin
n=
%=
________________________________________________________________________
Earth Religion
4
6.25%
________________________________________________________________________
Lucumi
2
50%
Heathenism
1
25%
Palo Mayombe
1
25%
________________________________________________________________________
Other Religions
60
93.75%
________________________________________________________________________
Catholicism
25
39.1%
Non-denominational Christianity
7
10.9%
Methodist Christianity
6
9.4%
No religion
5
7.8%
Baptist Christianity
4
6.25%
Protestant Christianity
4
6.25%
Agnostic
2
3.12%
Presbyterian Christianity
2
3.12%
Eastern Orthodox Christianity
1
1.6%
Fundamentalist Christianity
1
1.6%
Greek Orthodox Christianity
1
1.6%
Judaism
1
1.6%
Lutheran Christianity
1
1.6%
Neo-Christianity
1
1.6%
Seventh Day Adventist Christianity
1
1.6%
Southern Baptist/Evangelical Christianity
1
1.6%
________________________________________________________________________
Salience of Spirituality to Respondents’ Identities
When asked to rate their spirituality, age, gender, race/ethnicity, socioeconomic
status, disability, and sexual orientation in order of salience to their identity, the majority
of participants (61.9%, n = 39) rated their spirituality as extremely important to their
73
identity, while 27% of participants (n = 17) rated their spirituality as very important to
their identity. 6.3% of participants (n = 4) rated their spirituality as moderately important
to their identity, while 3.2% (n = 2) rated their spirituality as not at all important to their
identity. Finally, 1.6% of respondents (n = 1) rated their spirituality as of low importance
to their identity.
Table 31
Frequency and Percentage of the Salience of Spirituality to Respondent Identity
________________________________________________________________________
Salience of Spirituality to ID
n=
%=
________________________________________________________________________
Extremely important
39
61.9%
Very important
17
27%
Moderately important
4
6.3%
Not at all important
2
3.2%
Of low importance
1
1.6%
________________________________________________________________________
Chi square analyses were performed to identify any statistical differences between
religious groups’ ranking of the salience of spirituality to identity. Participants’ rankings
of the salience of their spirituality to their identity were averaged, then were divided into
“at or above average salience” and “below average salience” groups. A chi square
performed on the at or above average salience group revealed no significant differences
between European/American Pagans’ and African diaspora faith devotees’ ranking of the
salience of their spirituality to their identity, χ² (1, N = 44) = 1.455, p > .05. A chi square
performed on the below average salience group also revealed no significant differences
between European/American Pagans’ and African diaspora faith devotees’ ranking of the
salience of their spirituality to their identity, χ² (1, N = 5) = 0.200, p > .05.
74
Salience of Race/Ethnicity to Respondents’ Identities
When asked to rank their race/ethnicity in respect to its salience to their identity,
the majority of participants (61.9%, n = 39) rated their spirituality as extremely important
to their identity, while 27% of participants (n = 17) rated their spirituality as very
important to their identity. 6.3% of participants (n = 4) rated their spirituality as
moderately important to their identity, while 3.2% (n = 2) rated their spirituality as not at
all important to their identity. Finally, 1.6% of respondents (n = 1) rated their spirituality
as of low importance to their identity.
Table 32
Frequency and Percentage of the Salience of Race/Ethnicity to Respondent Identity
________________________________________________________________________
Salience of Race/Ethnicity to ID
n=
%=
________________________________________________________________________
Extremely important
6
9.5%
Very important
10
15.9%
Moderately important
12
19%
Neutral
16
25.4%
Slightly important
4
6.3%
Of low importance
6
9.5%
Not at all important
9
14.3%
________________________________________________________________________
Chi square analyses were performed to identify any statistical differences between
religious groups’ ranking of the salience of race/ethnicity to identity. Participants’
rankings of the salience of their race/ethnicity to their identity were averaged, then were
divided into “at or above average salience” and “below average salience” groups. A chi
square performed on the at or above average salience group revealed no significant
differences between European/American Pagans’ and African diaspora faith devotees’
ranking of the salience of their race/ethnicity to their identity, χ² (1, N = 35) = 0.029, p >
.05. However, a chi square performed on the below average salience group revealed
75
significant differences between European/American Pagans’ and African diaspora faith
devotees’ ranking of the salience of their race/ethnicity to their identity, χ² (1, N = 14) =
4.571, p = 0.033. Subsequently, statistically more European/American Pagans than
devotees of African diaspora faith ranked their race/ethnicity as of below average
importance to their identity.
Respondent Attributions of Distress
The majority of participants who responded to questions asking about their
understanding of significant distress that interfered with their daily functioning attributed
that distress to mental health diagnoses (n = 15). The next most common attributions
were work (n = 12) or relationships with other people (n = 11). The third most common
attributions of distress were financial concerns (n = 6), self (n = 6), and
trauma/disempowerment (n = 6). The fourth most common attribution of distress was
day-to-day stress (n = 5), and spiritual causes (n = 5). Physical illness/pain and imbalance
in the respondent’s life or the world were tied for the fifth most common attribution of
distress (n = 3 for both). Finally, the least frequently cited attributions of distress were
bad luck or uncontrollable events, major life changes, and isolation/loneliness (n = 2 for
each).
These responses were then grouped into secular and spiritual or oppressionrelated attributions. Participants who responded to questions about their understanding of
significant distress and attributed it to secular causes most often attributed that distress to
mental health diagnoses (n = 15). The next most common secular attributions were work
(n = 12) or relationships with other people (n = 11). The third most common secular
attributions of distress were financial concerns (n = 6) and self (n = 6), while the fourth
76
most common secular attribution was day-to-day stress (n = 5). Physical illness/pain was
the fifth most common secular attribution of distress (n = 3), and the sixth most common
secular attributions of distress were the bad luck or uncontrollable events, major life
changes, and isolation/loneliness (n = 2 for each).
Spiritual and oppression-related attributions of distress were grouped together and
differentiated from secular attributions of distress in this analysis. This decision was
made because in numerous cases, respondents cited religious or spiritually-themed
experiences of trauma or oppression (e.g., being bullied because of practicing a minority
faith). Trauma, oppression, and disempowerment accounted for the most common nonsecular attributions of distress (n = 6, fourth most common attribution of distress in
reference to total sample). Spiritual causes accounted for the second most common nonsecular attribution of distress (n = 5, fifth most common attribution of distress in
reference to total sample), while imbalance in the respondent’s life or world was the third
most common non-secular attribution of distress (n = 3, sixth most common attribution of
distress in reference to total sample).
These responses somewhat coincide with Almeida, Stawski, & Cichy’s identified
common forms of daily stress (2010). Relationships with other people and
isolation/loneliness can be re-termed as Almeida, Stawski, & Cichy’s “interpersonal
tensions;” while work, financial concerns, environmental/situational circumstances, bad
luck/uncontrollable events, and major life changes could be re-termed as Almeida,
Stawski, & Cichy’s “overloads” (2010). Similarly, day-to-day stress,
environmental/situational circumstances, bad luck/uncontrollable events, and major life
changes, depending upon participant’s definition, could also be re-termed as Almeida,
77
Stawski, & Cichy’s “network events.” However, mental health diagnoses (the number
one participant identified attribution of distress), self (tied for fourth most common
participant identified attribution of distress), trauma, oppression, or disempowerment
(tied for fourth most common attribution of distress), spiritual causes (tied for fifth most
common attribution of distress), physical illness/pain (tied for sixth most common
attribution of distress), and imbalance in the respondent’s life or world (tied for sixth
most common attribution of distress) are not clearly accounted for by Almeida, Stawski,
& Cichy’s daily stressful events model (2010).
Table 33
Frequency and Ranking of Respondents’ Attributions of Distress
________________________________________________________________________
Secular Attributions of Distress
n=
Total sample
ranking =
________________________________________________________________________
Mental health diagnoses
15
#1
Work (excluding work relationships)
12
#2
Relationships with other people
11
#3
Financial concerns
6
#4
Self
6
#4
Day-to-day stress
5
#5
Physical illness/pain
3
#6
Environmental/situational circumstances
2
#7
Bad luck/uncontrollable events
2
#7
Major life changes
2
#7
Isolation/loneliness
2
#7
________________________________________________________________________
Spiritual and Oppression-Related Attributions of Distress
n=
Total sample
ranking =
________________________________________________________________________
Trauma/oppression/disempowerment
6
#4
Spiritual causes
5
#5
Imbalance in respondent’s life or the world
3
#6
________________________________________________________________________
78
Respondents’ Preferred Methods for Coping with Distress
Preferred secular coping methods. Coping methods cited by participants were
categorized as secular or as non-secular (spiritual). Friends were respondents’ most
commonly cited secular resource accessed to cope with distress (n = 32). Family and
mental health services were tied as the next most commonly cited secular resource for
coping (n = 23 for each). Self (n = 8) and partner or spouse (n = 8) were tied as the third
most prevalent secular resource cited for coping with distress. Medical professionals and
movement and exercise were tied as the fourth most common secular way of dealing with
significant distress (n = 3 for each). Journaling and accessing supportive organizations
(such as Alcoholics Anonymous, Narcotics Anonymous, the Veterans Administration,
etc.) were tied as the fifth most commonly cited secular way respondents dealt with
distress (n = 2 for each). Finally, solitude, the internet, hobbies, drugs or alcohol, stoic
philosophy, and self-hypnosis were the least commonly cited secular coping strategies (n
= 1 for each).
Preferred spiritual coping methods . Religion or the divine was the most
common spiritual coping method cited by participants who answered questions inquiring
about their preferred ways of dealing with distress (n = 23, tied as one of the second most
common overall coping method cited by participants). Spiritual leaders, elders, and
counselors were the second most common spiritual coping method cited by participants
(n = 18, accounted for the third most common overall coping method cited by
participants). Meditation and prayer were the third most commonly cited spiritual method
of coping (n = 9, accounted for the fourth most common overall coping method cited by
participants). Religious rituals (different from those of meditation and prayer) were the
79
fourth most commonly cited spiritual coping resource (n = 7, accounted for the sixth most
common overall coping method). Appealing to deceased ancestors and spending time in
nature were tied as the fifth most common spiritual way of dealing with significant
distress (n = 3 for each, tied as one of the seventh most common overall coping methods
cited by participants). Finally, seeking out religious peers and/or spiritual community was
the sixth most commonly cited spiritual way respondents dealt with distress (n = 2, tied
as one of the eighth most commonly cited overall coping methods).
Similar to participant attributions of distress, participant identified ways of coping
somewhat coincided with research findings pertaining to other population’s coping
methods. Folkman & Lazarus (1985) identified eight common ways that individuals cope
with stressful events: problem focused coping, wishful thinking, distancing or
detachment, seeking social support, emphasizing the positive, self-blame, tension
reduction, and self-isolation. One could categorize some of the coping methods identified
by participants as falling within these categories.
For example, mental health services, medical professionals, accessing supportive
organizations, self-hypnosis, and spiritual leaders/elders/counselors (if the problem was
conceptualized as a spiritual one) could all be identified as problem-focused coping.
Utilizing the internet, hobbies, drugs or alcohol, and referring to stoic philosophy could
be identified as distancing or detaching coping methods. Seeking the support of mental
health services, medical professionals, friends, family, partners/spouses, supportive
organizations, spiritual leaders/elders/counselors, and religious peers/community can all
be conceptualized as forms of coping via social support. Referring to stoic philosophy
and engaging in self-hypnosis could also potentially be categorized as forms of self-
80
blame coping; however, this categorization would depend upon how the participant
understood and engaged in these activities. Additionally, movement and exercise,
journaling, hobbies, using the internet, and drugs and alcohol could be categorized as
tension reduction coping, while solitude and internet usage (depending upon the way it
was used) could be categorized as self-isolation coping.
Based upon this coping method framework, many of the coping methods
identified by participants fell into the categories of problem-focused, detached/distancing,
social support, self-blame, tension-reduction, and self-isolation coping. However, none of
the coping methods identified by participants clearly fell into the categories of
emphasizing the positive or wishful thinking coping. Additionally, participants also
identified the religion/divine, meditation and prayer, religious rituals, appealing to
deceased ancestors, nature, and “self” (not elaborated upon) as commonly used methods
of coping with distress, which are not accounted for by the categories of problemfocused, detached/distancing, social support, self-blame, tension-reduction, self-isolation,
emphasizing the positive, or wishful thinking coping (Folkman & Lazarus, 1985).
Table 34
Frequency and Ranking of Respondents’ Preferred Methods for Coping with Distress
________________________________________________________________________
Preferred Secular Coping Methods
n=
Total sample
ranking =
________________________________________________________________________
Friends
32
#1
Family
23
#2
Mental health services
23
#2
Self
8
#5
Partner/spouse
8
#5
Medical professionals
3
#7
Movement and exercise
3
#7
Journaling
2
#8
Accessing supportive organizations
2
#8
81
Solitude
1
#9
The internet
1
#9
Hobbies
1
#9
Drugs/alcohol
1
#9
Stoic philosophy
1
#9
Self-hypnosis
1
#9
________________________________________________________________________
Preferred Spiritual Coping Methods
n=
Total sample
ranking =
________________________________________________________________________
Religion/the Divine
23
#2
Spiritual leaders/elders/counselors
18
#3
Meditation and prayer
9
#4
Religious rituals
7
#6
Appealing to deceased ancestors
3
#7
Nature
3
#7
Seeking out religious peers/community
2
#8
________________________________________________________________________
Availability of and Respondent Willingness to Seek Mental Health Services
96.7% of respondents (n = 58) indicated that mental health services were
available in their community. 1.7% (n = 1) indicated that they were unsure if services
were available, and another 1.7% (n = 1) indicated that services were not available (see
Table 35 and Figure 14).
Table 35
Frequency and Percentage of Availability of Mental Health Services to Respondents
________________________________________________________________________
Availability of Mental Health Services
n=
%=
________________________________________________________________________
Services available
58
96.7%
Unsure if services available
1
1.7%
Services not available
1
1.7%
________________________________________________________________________
73% of participants (n = 44) indicated that they would be willing to seek mental
health services if their first interventions or efforts to relieve distress didn’t work. 27% of
participants (n = 16) indicated that they would not be willing to seek mental health
82
services if their first efforts to relieve distress did not work (see Figure 15). Of the 27%
who would not seek services, the most commonly cited reasons were feeling as if they
had other resources they would use to cope with the distress (n = 5), or that their
spirituality/worldview would not be understood (n = 3). Other reasons for not seeking
mental health services included: using spiritual sources to cope, privacy/disclosure
concerns, not believing in mental health services, not believing that her/his problems can
be solved, and not being able to afford services (n = 1 for each).
Table 36
Frequency and Percentage of Respondent Willingness to Seek Mental Health Services
________________________________________________________________________
Degree of Willingness
n=
%=
________________________________________________________________________
Would seek services
44
73%
Would not seek services
16
16%
________________________________________________________________________
Table 37
Frequency and Ranking of Reasons Why Respondents Would Not Seek Mental Health
Services
________________________________________________________________________
Reason
n=
Ranking =
________________________________________________________________________
Have other resources to cope
5
#1
Believe spirituality/worldview would be misunderstood
3
#2
Use spiritual resources to cope
1
#3
Privacy/disclosure concerns
1
#3
Do not believe in mental health services
1
#3
Do not believe problems can be solved
1
#3
Cannot afford services
1
#3
________________________________________________________________________
Chi square analyses were performed to identify any statistical differences between
religious groups’ willingness to seek mental health services if their first efforts to resolve
distress failed. No statistical differences were found between African diaspora faith
83
devotees’ and European/American Pagans’ willingness, χ² (1, N = 34) = 1.882, p > .05, or
unwillingness, χ² (1, N = 13) = 0.077, p > .05 to seek mental health services.
Respondents’ Perceived Benefit of Mental Health Services
73.3% of respondents (n = 44) indicated that they believed mental health services
would be helpful to them if they were experiencing significant distress that interfered
with their daily functioning. 18.3% (n = 11) stated that they did not believe mental health
services would be helpful, and 8.3% (n = 5) stated that they were unsure if mental health
services would be helpful if they were experiencing significant distress that interfered
with their daily functioning (see Table 38 and Figure 16).
Table 38
Frequency and Percentage of Respondents Who Believed Mental Health Services Could
Help Them Personally
________________________________________________________________________
Belief in helpfulness of services
n=
%=
________________________________________________________________________
Would be helpful
44
73.3%
Would not be helpful
11
18.3%
Unsure if services would be helpful
5
8.3%
________________________________________________________________________
In contrast, 51.7% of respondents (n = 31) indicated that they believed mental
health services would be helpful to someone else of the same faith if (s)he was
experiencing significant distress that interfered with her/his daily functioning. Another
40% (n = 24) stated that they were unsure if mental health services would be helpful to
someone else of the same faith. Finally, 8.3% of respondents (n = 5) indicated that they
did not believe mental health services would be helpful to someone else of the same faith
if (s)he was experiencing significant distress that interfered with her/his daily functioning
(see Figure 17).
84
Table 39
Frequency and Percentage of Respondents Who Believed Mental Health Services Could
Help Others of the Same Faith
________________________________________________________________________
Belief in helpfulness of services
n=
%=
________________________________________________________________________
Would be helpful
31
51.7%
Unsure if services would be helpful
24
40%
Would not be helpful
5
8.3%
________________________________________________________________________
Chi square analyses were performed to identify any statistical differences between
religious groups’ perceived benefit of mental health services. No statistical differences
were found between African diaspora faith devotees’ and European/American Pagans’
belief that services would be helpful to them personally, χ² (1, N = 39) = 1.256, p > .05,
or unhelpful to them personally, χ² (1, N = 13) = 0.000, p > .05. Moreover, no statistical
differences were found between African diaspora faith devotees’ and European/American
Pagans’ belief that services would be helpful to others’ in their religious community, χ²
(1, N = 27) = 1.815, p > .05, or unhelpful to others’ in their religious community, χ² (1, N
= 4) = 0.00, p > .05.
Religious Discrimination
Respondents’ fear of religious discrimination. 23.3% of respondents (n = 14)
reported feeling neutral[ly] regarding the fear of religious discrimination when
considering seeking mental health services. However, 41.7% of all respondents reported
experiencing some fear of religious discrimination when considering seeking mental
health services (very afraid = 11.7%, n = 7; somewhat afraid = 30%, n = 18). In contrast,
35% of all respondents reported not experiencing fear of religious discrimination when
85
considering seeking mental health services (not afraid = 16.7%, n = 10; not at all afraid
= 18.3%, n = 11) (see Table 40 and Figure 18).
Table 40
Frequency and Percentage of Respondents Who Feared Religious Discrimination When
Considering Seeking Mental Health Services
________________________________________________________________________
Fear of Discrimination
n=
%=
________________________________________________________________________
Somewhat afraid
18
30%
Very afraid
7
11.7%
Neutral (neither afraid nor unafraid)
14
23.3%
Not afraid
10
16.7%
Not at all afraid
11
18.3%
________________________________________________________________________
Chi square analyses were performed to identify any statistical differences between
religious groups’ reported fear of religious discrimination. Participants’ ratings of their
fear of encountering religious discrimination when seeking mental health services were
averaged, then were divided into “at or above average fear level” and “below average
fear level” groups. A chi square performed on the at or above average fear level group
yielded results that approached statistical differences between European/American
Pagans and African diaspora faith devotees, χ² (1, N = 35) = 3.667, p = 0.056.
Specifically, European/American Pagans endorsed fear of religious discrimination when
considering seeking mental health services a rate that approached being statistically
higher than the rate reported by devotees of African diaspora faith. A chi square
performed on the below average fear group, however, revealed no significant differences
between European/American Pagans’ and African diaspora faith devotees’ fear of
religious discrimination, χ² (1, N = 14) = 0.00, p > .05.
86
69.2% of respondents (n = 27) indicated that their fear of religious discrimination
did not prevent them from seeking mental health services. However, 20.5% (n = 8) stated
that fear of religious discrimination did prevent them from seeking mental health
services, and another 10.3% (n = 4) noted that they were unsure if fear of religious
discrimination impacted their service-seeking patterns (see Table 41 and Figure 19).
Table 41
Frequency and Percentage of Respondents Who Did Not Seek Mental Health Services
Due to Fear of Religious Discrimination
________________________________________________________________________
Impact of Fear of Discrimination
n=
%=
________________________________________________________________________
Did not prevent service-seeking
27
69.2%
Prevented service-seeking
8
20.5%
Unsure if fear impacted service-seeking
4
10.3%
________________________________________________________________________
Chi square analyses were performed to locate any significant differences between
religious groups’ service-seeking frequencies due to the impact of fear of religious
discrimination. No statistical differences were found between African diaspora faith
devotees and European/American Pagans who sought mental health services, despite fear
of religious discrimination, χ² (1, N = 23) = 1.087, p > .05, nor were any differences
found between African diaspora faith devotees and European/American Pagans who did
not seek mental health services due to fear of religious discrimination, χ² (1, N = 7) =
0.147, p > .05.
Respondents’ experience of religious discrimination. 76.7% (n = 46) of all
respondents stated that they have received mental health services (operationalized as
attending therapy, seeing a psychiatrist, or receiving services from a social worker) in the
past. Conversely, 23.3% of respondents indicated that they have not received mental
87
health services in the past (n = 14). (See Figure 20). Chi square analyses were performed
to locate any significant differences between religious groups’ frequencies of seeking
mental health services. No statistical differences were found among the number of
European/American Pagans and African diaspora faith devotees who have received
mental health services, χ² (1, N = 39) = 2.077, p > .05, nor were statistical differences
found among the number of European/American Pagans and African diaspora faith
devotees who have not received mental health services, χ² (1, N = 8) = 0.500, p > .05.
Of the respondent sample who stated that they had received mental health
services, 78.3% (n = 36) indicated that they had not experienced religious discrimination
or persecution by past mental health providers. However, 13% (n = 6) indicated that they
had experienced religious discrimination, and another 8.7% (n = 4) indicated that they
were unsure if they were treated in a discriminatory manner because of their religion (see
Table 42 and Figure 21).
Table 42
Frequency and Percentage of Respondents Who Experienced Religious Discrimination
When Seeking Mental Health Services
________________________________________________________________________
Experienced Discrimination When Seeking Services
n=
%=
________________________________________________________________________
Have not experienced religious discrimination
36
78.3%
Have experienced religious discrimination
6
13%
Unsure if experienced religious discrimination
4
8.7%
________________________________________________________________________
Chi square analyses were performed to locate any significant differences between
religious groups’ experience of religious discrimination. Only European/American
Pagans endorsed experiencing religious discrimination when seeking mental health
services, thus, a chi square could not be performed. However, groups of both
88
European/American Pagans and African diaspora faith devotees denied experiencing
religious discrimination when seeking mental health services, thus a chi square was
performed on these groups. No statistical differences were found between
European/American Pagans and African diaspora faith devotees who denied experiencing
religious discrimination when seeking mental health services, χ² (1, N = 30) = 0.00, p >
.05.
Respondents’ Experiences with Mental Health Services and Religiosity
Respondent disclosure of religious orientation to mental health providers.
Over one-third of participants (39.1%, n = 18) indicated that they disclosed their
spirituality to their mental health provider. 21.7% of respondents (n = 10) indicated that
they sometimes disclose their spirituality to their mental health provider, while another
21.7% of respondents (n = 10) indicated that they did not disclose their spirituality to
their mental health provider. Finally, 17.4% of respondents (n = 8) indicated that their
mental health provider did not ask them about their spirituality (see Table 43 and Figure
22).
Table 43
Frequency and Percentage of Respondents Who Disclosed Their Spirituality When
Seeking Mental Health Services
________________________________________________________________________
Disclosure of Spirituality
n=
%=
________________________________________________________________________
Disclosed spirituality
18
39.1%
Sometimes disclosed spirituality
10
21.7%
Did not disclose spirituality
10
21.7%
Not asked about spirituality by provider
8
17.4%
________________________________________________________________________
Chi square analyses were performed to locate any significant differences between
religious groups’ disclosure of spirituality. Statistical differences were found between
89
religious groups who did disclose their spirituality, χ² (1, N = 16) = 6.250, p = 0.012, but
not between groups that did not, χ² (1, N = 8) = 2.00, p > .05, or only sometimes, χ² (1, N
= 9) = 1.00, p > .05, disclose their spirituality. European/American Pagans disclosed their
spirituality to their mental health provider at a statistically significantly higher rate than
practitioners of African diaspora faiths. However, no statistical differences were found
between religious groups who did not or only sometimes disclose their spirituality to their
mental health provider.
Mental health providers’ comprehension of respondents’ religion. Overall, the
majority of respondents indicated that mental health providers’ understood their faith
neither poorly nor well (52.8%, n = 19). 19.4% of respondents indicated that their mental
health provider understood their faith well (n = 7), whereas 13.9% of respondents felt that
their mental health provider understood their faith poorly (n = 5). Another 8.3% stated
that they felt their faith was understood very poorly (n = 3). Finally, 5.6% (n = 2) of
respondents indicated feeling as if their faith was understood very well (see Table 44 and
Figure 23).
Table 44
Frequency and Percentage of Mental Health Providers’ Comprehension of Respondents’
Spirituality
________________________________________________________________________
Degree of Comprehension
n=
%=
________________________________________________________________________
Neither poorly nor well
19
52.8%
Well
7
19.4%
Very well
2
5.6%
Poorly
5
13.9%
Very poorly
3
8.3%
________________________________________________________________________
90
Chi square analyses were performed to locate any significant differences between
religious groups’ perceptions of their mental health providers’ understanding of their
spirituality. Participants’ ratings of their perception of their mental health providers’
understanding of their faith were averaged, then were divided into “at or above average
understanding” and “below average fear understanding” groups. A chi square performed
on the at or above average understanding group yielded results that approached statistical
differences between European/American Pagans and African diaspora faith devotees, χ²
(1, N = 24) = 2.667, p = 0.102. Specifically, European/American Pagans rated their
mental health providers’ understanding of their faith at a rate that approached being
statistically higher than the rate reported by devotees of African diaspora faith.
Additionally, a chi square performed on the below average understanding group
yielded results that approached statistical differences between European/American
Pagans and African diaspora faith devotees, χ² (1, N = 7) = 3.571, p = 0.059.
Specifically, European/American Pagans rated their mental health providers’
understanding of their faith at a rate that approached being statistically lower than the rate
reported by devotees of African diaspora faith. Subsequently, European/American Pagans
rated their mental health providers’ understanding of their faith in more extreme terms
than devotees of African diaspora faith, and did so at a rate that approached statistical
significance.
Mental health providers’ religious behaviors and communications. The
majority of respondents indicated that they have never had a mental health provider
proselytize to them or try to convert them to another faith (82.6% n = 38). However,
15.2% (n = 7) endorsed having a mental health provider who proselytized to them and/or
91
attempted to convert them to another faith (see Table 45 and Figure 24), while another
2.2% (n = 1) were unsure if a mental health provider ever proselytized to them or tried to
convert them.
Table 45
Frequency and Percentage of Respondents Who Were Proselytized to by a Mental Health
Provider, or Whose Mental Health Provider Tried to Convert Them to Another Faith
________________________________________________________________________
Proselytization/Conversion Experience
n=
%=
________________________________________________________________________
Did not experience
38
82.6%
Experienced
7
15.2%
Unsure if experienced
1
2.2%
________________________________________________________________________
Moreover, exactly half of respondents indicated that the mental health providers they had
seen (50%, n = 23) displayed religious symbols, images, or phrases in their office or on
their person. In contrast, another half (50%, n = 23) of mental health providers abstained
from such practices (see Table 46 and Figure 25).
Table 46
Frequency and Percentage of Respondents Whose Mental Health Provider Displayed
Religious Symbols, Images, or Phrases
________________________________________________________________________
Mental Health Providers’ Religious Displays
n=
%=
________________________________________________________________________
Displayed religious symbols/images/phrases
23
50%
Did not display religious symbols/images/phrases
23
50%
________________________________________________________________________
Finally, the majority of respondents whose mental health providers displayed
religious symbols, images, or phrases reported feeling “neutral[ly]” about this practice
(47.8%, n = 11). However, 21.7% (n = 5) reported feeling uncomfortable, and another
21.7% (n = 5) reported feeling very uncomfortable. In contrast, 8.7% (n = 2) reported
92
feeling comfortable with their mental health providers’ display of religious symbols,
images, or phrases (see Table 47 and Figure 26).
Table 47
Frequency and Percentage of Respondent Comfort Level with Mental Health Providers’
Display of Religious Symbols, Images, or Phrases
________________________________________________________________________
Respondents’ Comfort Level
n=
%=
________________________________________________________________________
Neutral
11
47.8%
Uncomfortable
5
21.7%
Very uncomfortable
5
21.7%
Comfortable
2
8.7%
________________________________________________________________________
93
Discussion
In the pursuit of this research, the researcher sought to gather basic demographic
data about practitioners of earth-centered faith, as well as to discover how salient
spirituality is to the identity of this group, if mental health services are available in the
communities of this group, if this group believes mental health services could be helpful,
and if religious discrimination is experienced when this group seeks mental health
services. This sample of devotees of earth-centered faith (n = 64) is fairly diverse in terms
of earth religious path, sect of religious path, age, gender identity, racial and ancestral
identity, sexual orientation, disability status, and socioeconomic status. Subsequently, the
results of this research can be cautiously applied to the earth-centered religious
community. While some respondents’ primary minority identity status seemed to be their
spirituality, others had multiple minority statuses, including their racial identity, gender
identity, racial and ancestral identity, sexual orientation, disability status, and
socioeconomic status, as well as their spirituality.
The majority of respondents in this sample ranked their spirituality as extremely
important (61.9%) or very important (27%) to their identity. Moreover, there were no
statistical differences found between the two largest religious groups in how they rated
the importance of their spirituality to their identity. It is possible that respondents were
primed to rank their spirituality higher in its salience to their identity due to the fact that
they were invited to participate in a questionnaire about earth-centered faith. However,
many respondents indicated that their spirituality was more important to their identity
94
than any other variable—including age, gender, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, sexual
orientation, and disability. In fact, in some cases, the degree of importance respondents
placed upon the role of their spirituality in their identity was over twice that of other
variables. Subsequently, it seems unlikely that the priming effect alone can explain the
significant salience of spirituality to the identities of devotees of earth-centered faith.
Moreover, the reported salience of respondents’ spirituality to their identity contrasts
significantly with the percentage of respondents who were not asked about their
spirituality by their mental health provider (17.4%, n = 8).
Additionally, while not all practitioners of European/American Paganism (E/AP)
identified as having European heritage, and not all practitioners of African diaspora faith
(ADF) identified as having African heritage, more E/APs than practitioners of ADF
identified as having European heritage. Similarly, more practitioners of ADF than
practitioners of E/AP identified as having African heritage. Due to the social location,
power, and privilege that accompany European heritage, or “whiteness,” individuals who
identified as E/AP and white/of European descent may have had only one minority
identity—their spirituality. However, due to the social location, disempowerment, and
oppression that often accompany African heritage, or “blackness,” individuals who
identified as practitioners of ADF and as black/of African descent had at least two
minority identities—their spirituality and their race. This principle also applies to other
participants of color—including those who practiced ADF and those who practiced other
earth religions.
While individuals who have a visible dominant or majority identity often do not
have to think about that identity, due to its inherent power and privilege, individuals who
95
have a visible nondominant or minority identity are more frequently reminded of that
identity, and may find themselves noticeably impacted by that identity as they navigate
the world (Johnson, 2006). Subsequently, it makes intuitive sense that participants of
color find themselves reminded of the salience of their race more often than white
participants, and therefore, in comparison with devotees of African diaspora faith, E/AP
respondents rated their race as below average in importance. Future research can examine
the implication of spirituality as one of multiple minority variables, as opposed to an
individual’s only minority identity variable; as well as how these variations in social
location impact the seeking, engagement with, and receipt of mental health services.
Concerning Aspects of Findings
Nearly one-fifth of the respondent sample (18.3%) indicated that they did not
believe mental health services would be helpful to them personally, and even more (40%)
indicated that they were unsure if or did not think (8.3%) that mental health services
would be helpful to others in their religious community. The facts that 41.7% of all
respondents reported fearing religious discrimination when considering seeking mental
health services, 13% actually experienced religious discrimination by mental health
providers, 52.8% of respondents who received mental health services in the past felt that
their providers understood their religious beliefs neither poorly nor well, and that 22.2%
of respondents felt that their mental health provider understood their faith poorly could
easily contribute to this phenomenon. Interestingly, E/APs rated their mental health
providers’ understanding of their faith—both the presence and absence of said
understanding—in more extreme terms than did devotees of ADF. Subsequently, further
research with and outreach to this population, as well as increased cultural competence on
96
the diversity variable of religion is clearly warranted on the part of the mental health
community
Statistical analysis indicated that European/American Pagans disclose their
spirituality at a higher rate than devotees of African diaspora faith, yet also endorse fear
of religious discrimination when considering seeking mental health services a rate that
approached being statistically higher than the rate reported by devotees of ADF.
Moreover, in the context of this study, only European/American Pagans endorsed
actually experiencing religious discrimination when seeking mental health services.
Future research can explore if this finding is due to the single v. multiple minority
identity phenomenon and a desensitization to discrimination that occurs after an
individual has experienced a critical amount of discrimination, or if this finding can be
explained by another phenomenon.
Unfortunately, the very real fear of religious discrimination prevented 20.5%-approximately one-fifth of the individuals who responded to the researcher’s
questionnaire from seeking mental health services. (Contrast this number with the
number of those who have access to mental health services: 96.7%). This is especially
tragic when one revisits respondents’ attributions of distress. The number one respondent
attribution of distress was tied between relationships with other people and specific
mental health diagnoses (e.g. anxiety, depression, PTSD, etc.). Subsequently,
respondents’ own reports suggest that they realize that a large amount of the distress they
experience is due to a mental health diagnosis—which one would ordinarily treat by
seeing a mental health provider. This disconnect between attribution of distress and
willingness to seek services clearly speaks to the mental health field’s failure to
97
normalize and incorporate majority and minority faith in the treatment of significant
psychological distress.
Other common attributions of participant distress included spiritual ones, such as
imbalance in the participant’s life/the greater world, and spiritual causes. Moreover,
religion or the divine, spiritual leaders, elders, and counselors, meditation and prayer,
religious rituals, appealing to deceased ancestors, and seeking out religious peers and/or
spiritual community were also frequently cited participant ways of coping with distress.
The spiritually charged nature of these attributions and coping resources clearly calls for
more diversity competence in the domain of spirituality when mental health providers
serve earth religious clients.
Interestingly, only 6.25% of respondents (n = 4) indicated that they were raised in
a family that practiced earth religion, while 93.75% of respondents (n = 60) indicated that
they were raised in a family that did not practice earth religion. When one considers that
mental health providers frequently consult clients’ family of origin or religious
community in order to assess the “typicality” of a client’s religious beliefs, this presents a
very real problem. While clients with mental health issues who also practice mainstream
faiths such as Christianity, Judaism, and Islam experience the privilege of often having a
family who practices their faith or an easily accessible religious community with whom a
mental health provider can consult, clients with mental health issues who also practice
less common faiths such as earth religion do not experience this same privilege.
Encouraging Aspects of Findings
Surprisingly, the majority of practitioners of earth-centered faith (96.7%)
indicated that mental health services are available in their community. Moreover, they
98
even ranked these services as the second most commonly accessed method (after friends,
and tied with religion/the divine and with family) to deal with significant distress. 73% of
respondents indicated that they would be willing to seek mental health services if they
were experiencing significant psychological distress, and another 73.3% indicated that
they believed that these services would be helpful. Across the sects of earth religions
statistically analyzed (African diaspora faith and European/American Pagansim), there
were no significant differences found regarding religious groups’ willingness to seek
mental health services when other attempts at resolving distress failed. Additionally,
there were no statistical differences found within earth religious groups’ willingness to
seek mental health services even when they were afraid of religious discrimination.
Furthermore, across the sects of earth religions statistically analyzed there were no
significant differences found regarding religious groups’ perceived benefit of mental
health services —neither for themselves, nor for others of the same faith.
While a significant percentage of respondents reported feeling afraid of
experiencing religious discrimination when seeking mental health services, another 35%
of all respondents reported not feeling afraid of religious discrimination when
considering seeking mental health services. Moreover, while a significant percentage of
respondents indicated that they felt their mental health provider understood their faith
poorly, or neither poorly nor well, another 25% indicated that their provider understood
their faith well. These findings may suggest that some mental health providers have
already made significant strides towards achieving diversity competence with earth
religion as an identity variable.
Limitations of Study
99
This study experienced several limitations. Some of the limitations included
logistical aspects, such as the internet-bound nature of the online questionnaire, and the
way in which this likely limited the participant pool to individuals with access to
computers with internet access, and with the leisure time to complete a questionnaire on
said computer. Moreover, the significant dearth of peer-reviewed literature on the
juxtaposition of earth-centered faith and mental health significantly limited the research
this author could use to inform and compare and contrast with her study.
Additionally, the earth centered religious community is one with some native
English speakers, and many native speakers of other languages, including Spanish,
French, Portuguese, and others. The construction of the researcher’s instrument in one
language (English) likely limited the number and diversity of participants. In future
studies, it would be highly beneficial to translate the assessment instrument into multiple
languages, including as least Spanish, French, and Portuguese. Other limitations of the
assessment instrument included the absence of a “not applicable” or “N/A” category on
the salience of identity variables question, as well as the absence of definitions of terms
used in the instrument (such as religious discrimination, proselytization, etc.).
Additionally, questions 31 and 32, pertaining to the behavior, speech, and professional
surroundings of mental health providers who are sensitive to earth-centered religion
should be clarified or eliminated, as participant responses suggested that participants
were confused by or did not understand the questions. Finally, if all diversity variables of
the ADDRESSING (Age, Developmental and acquired Disability, Religion, Ethnicity
and race, Sexual Orientation, Socioeconomic status, Indigenous heritage, National origin,
100
Gender) model (Hays, 2007) are to be included in future versions of the assessment
instrument, more relevant and sophisticated disability questions should be included.
Strengths of Study
This study also exhibits numerous strengths. These include the trailblazing nature
of its construction, as to the author’s knowledge, it is the first of its kind that a)
simultaneously presents information on the three main branches of contemporary earthcentered faith, and b) explores and illuminates how devotees of these faiths experience
and perceive psychological distress and mental health services. Moreover, this study adds
data to the field about a poorly understood and often marginalized religious group, and
also provides enough basic information on each branch of earth centered faith to inform
mental health providers on the fundamental spiritual beliefs of their earth religious
clients. Additionally, the study illuminates some of the fears and concerns of this
religious group regarding mental health services, which can inform clinicians on how
best to intervene, and what to avoid when working with this religious group.
Furthermore, the sample size (n = 64) includes enough participants of each branch of
earth religion, as well as enough participants with diverse identity variables such as
gender identity, racial and ethnic background, sexual orientation, disability status, and
socioeconomic status that cautious interpretations about these groups can be formed.
Directions for Future Research
Due to the richness of the current study’s data set, numerous future analyses can
be performed. Such analyses may include further examinations of variances within earth
religious groups, and of how those religious groups describe themselves
demographically. Additionally, future analyses can examine variances within earth
101
religious groups’ perceptions and experiences of mental health services, as well as
variances within earth religious groups’ experiences of and methods of coping with
psychological distress. Furthermore, examinations of variance between earth religious
groups and dominant religious groups may also be helpful—especially regarding each
groups’ perception of the salience of spirituality to identity and any interplay between
spirituality and the experience of psychological distress.
Moreover, future research can examine the ways in which the mental health
community can provide outreach to earth religious communities, as well as how the
mental health community can position itself as an ally, rather than an antagonist, to the
earth religious community. Finally, it is also strongly recommended that future
researchers employ assessment instruments in languages besides English (such as
Spanish, French, and Portuguese) due to this religious group’s geographic and linguistic
diversity.
102
Appendix A
Questionnaire
1) Do you practice an earth-based religion such as traditional aboriginal/Native
American spirituality, Paganism, Santería, Lucumi, Vodou, Candomblé, Umbanda,
etc.?
Yes
No
(if this box is checked, survey will close and respondent is thanked
for their participation)
2) Do you identify as (a)
Practitioner of traditional aboriginal/Native American spirituality (redirects to 3a)
Practitioner of Lucumi, Santería, or Ifa (redirects to 3b)
Practitioner of Vodou/Voodoo (redirects to 3c)
Practitioner of Candomblé or Umbanda (redirects to 3d)
Practitioner of (Neo)Paganism (including Wicca, witchcraft, Druidism,
heathenism, and Asatru) (redirects to 3e)
Practitioner of another earth/nature religion (redirects to 3f)
3a) More specifically, I identify as (a)
Practitioner of traditional aboriginal/ Native American/ American Indian
spirituality
Medicine (wo)man
Shaman
My spiritual path was not mentioned. I identify as:
3b) More specifically, I identify as (a)
Santero/a
Babalorisha/Iyalorisha
Babalawo
Oga/Ekeji
Iyawo
Aleyo
Brujo/a /ita
My spiritual path was not mentioned. I identify as:
103
3c) More specifically, I identify as (a)
Mambo/Houngan
Hounsi
Vodouisant
My spiritual path was not mentioned. I identify as:
3d) More specifically, I identify as (a)
Mae/Pais-de-santo
Ialorixá/Babalorixá
Babalawo
Candomblezeiro
My spiritual path is not mentioned above. I identify as:
3e) More specifically, I identify as (a)
Pagan
Neopagan
Wiccan
Witch
Druid
Heathen
Asatru
My spiritual path is not mentioned above. I identify as:
3f) More specifically, I identify as (a)
Ecospiritualist
Hoodoo practitioner
Eclectic
My spiritual path is not mentioned. I identify as:
4) Were you raised in a family that practiced earth-based religion?
Yes
No
5) What religion did your family of origin practice, if any?
6) What is your age?
7) Do you identify as (a)
Woman
104
Man
Intersexed
Transwoman (male to female)
Transman (female to male)
Gender Queer/Androgynous
(My gender identity is not mentioned above)
8) What is your race? (check as many as apply)
Aboriginal/Indigenous (redirects to 9a)
Asian (redirects to 9b)
Black/of African descent (redirects to 9c)
Latino(a)/Hispanic (redirects to 9d)
White/of European descent (redirects to 9e)
Biracial (check 2 ethnicities above)
Multiracial (check 3 or more ethnicities above)
(My race is not mentioned above)
9a) What is your nationality/ethnicity? (check as many as apply)
American Indian/Native American
(please specify nation/tribe(s), if known)
Alaskan Native
(please specify nation/tribe(s), if known)
Australian
(please specify: European/ aboriginal/ _______ descent)
Latino/a
(please specify: Cuban/Dominican/Mexican/ Puerto Rican/etc)
Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander
(________ please specify)
9b) What is your nationality/ethnicity? (check as many as apply)
Asian (please specify countr(y)(ies), if known)
Asian American (please specify countr(y)(ies), if known)
9c) What is your nationality/ethnicity? (check as many as apply)
African (please specify country/ies, if known)
African American
of African descent [please specify country/ies, if known (e.g.: Haitian, Jamaican,
_________)]
9d) What is your nationality/ethnicity? (check as many as apply)
Cuban
105
Cuban American
Dominican
Dominican American
Mexican
Mexican American
Puerto Rican
Puerto Rican American
My nationality/ethnicity is not mentioned. I identify as:
9e) What is your nationality/ethnicity? (check as many as apply)
European American (please specify countries of origin, if known)
European (please specify countries of origin, if known)
Countr(y)(ies) of origin:
10) How would you describe your socioeconomic status (class)?
Lower class (impoverished)
Lower middle class
Middle class
Upper middle class
Upper class
11) Do you have a disability?
Yes (redirects to question 12)
No (redirects to question 13)
12) Were you born with your disability?
Yes
No
13) How do you describe your sexual orientation?
Lesbian
Gay
Bisexual
Heterosexual
Pansexual/Omnisexual
Asexual
My sexual orientation is not mentioned above ______________
14) How important are your spirituality, age, gender, race/ethnicity, class/SES,
disability, and sexual orientation to your identity? Please rate each below.
My spirituality
106
My age
My gender
My race/ethnicity
My class/socioeconomic status
My disability
My sexual orientation
15) If you were experiencing significant distress that interfered with your daily
functioning, to what/who do you attribute the distress?
16) If your first interventions or efforts to relieve distress didn’t work, would you
consider seeking mental health or psychological services?
Yes
No
If no, please comment:
17) When you are in distress, where, to what, or to whom do you go for help? (List
the 3 resources you use most frequently)
18) Are mental health or psychological services (counseling/therapy, psychiatry,
assistance of social workers) available in your community?
Yes
No
Unsure
19) If mental health or psychological services are/were available in your community,
do you think they would be helpful if you were experiencing distress that interfered
with daily functioning?
Yes
No
Unsure
Services Not Available
20) If mental health or psychological services are/were available in your community,
do you think they would be helpful for someone else of your same faith who was
experiencing distress that interfered with daily functioning?
Yes
No
Unsure
107
Services Not Available
21) Have you ever been afraid of experiencing religious discrimination or
persecution when considering seeking mental health services?
1
2
3
4
5
Very
Afraid
Neutral
Not
Not at all
Afraid
Afraid
Afraid
22) Did your concern ever keep you from seeking mental health or psychological
services?
Yes
No
Unsure
23) Have you ever received mental health or psychological services (i.e. attended
counseling/therapy, saw a psychiatrist, received services from a social worker)?
Yes
No
(those who answer no will be directed to 31-33)
24) Have you ever experienced religious discrimination/persecution when seeking
mental health/psychological services?
Yes
No
Unsure
25) Did/do you disclose your religion or spirituality to your mental health provider?
Yes
No (redirects to 28)
Sometimes
Not asked by provider
(redirects to 28)
26) If you chose not disclose your religion/spirituality to your mental health
provider, do you know why?
27) If you have received mental health/psychological services and disclosed your
religion/spirituality to your provider, how well do you feel (s)he understood your
beliefs?
1
Very
Poorly
2
Poorly
3
Neutral
4
Well
5
Very
Well
28) Has a mental health provider ever proselytized to you or tried to convert you to
a different faith?
Yes
No
108
29) Have you ever had a mental health provider who displayed religious symbols,
images, or sayings in their office or on their person?
Yes
No
30) If so, how did it make you feel?
1
2
Very
Uncomfortable
Uncomfortable
3
Neutral
4
Comfortable
5
Very
Comfortable
31) How would a mental health provider who was sensitive to your spirituality
behave and speak?
32) What would the office of a mental health provider who was sensitive to your
spirituality look like?
33) Is there anything this questionnaire didn’t ask that it should have asked to
better understand how spirituality played a role in your seeking/not seeking of
mental health services or in the quality of the services you received as a practitioner
of an earth-based religion?
Yes (please elaborate below)
No
109
Unsure
Appendix B
Figures
Figure B1. Types of earth
earth-centered faith practiced by respondents
Figure B2.. European/American Pagan spiritual paths of respondents
110
Figure B3.. Santerían, Lucumi, and Ifa spiritual paths of respondents
Figure B4. Candomblé spiritual paths of respondents
111
Figure B5.. Vodou/Voodoo spiritual paths of respondents
Figure B6.. Native American spiritual paths of respondents
112
Figure B7.. Other earth and nature religious paths of respondents
entity of respondents
Figure B8. Gender identity
113
Figure B9. Self-identified
identified socioeconomic status of respondents
Figure B10.. Disability status of respondents
114
Figure B11.. Disability status of respondents: Congenital v. acquired disabilities
Figure B12.. Sexual orientation of respondents
115
Figure B13.. Percentage of respondents who were raised in earth religious families
Figure B14.. Availability of mental health services to respondents
116
Figure B15.. Respondent willingness to seek mental health ser
services
vices if first attempts at
relieving significant distress didn’t work
Figure B16.. Respondents’ belief that mental health services would benefit them
personally
117
Figure B17.. Respondents’ belief that mental health services would benefit others of the
same faith
Figure B18.. Respondents’ fear of religious discrimination when seeking mental health
services
118
Figure B19.. Impact of fear of religious discrimination
Figure B20.. Percentage of respondents who have received mental health services
119
Figure B21.. Percentage of respondents who have sought mental health services and
experienced religious discrimination
Figure B22.. Respondent disclosure of faith to mental health provider
120
Figure B23.. Respondent perception of mental health providers’ understanding of their
faith
Figure B24.. Percentage of respondents who reported having a mental health provider
proselytize and/or try to convert them to another faith
121
Figure 25.. Percentage of respondents whose mental health providers displayed religious
symbols, sayings,
gs, or images in their offices
Figure B26.. Respondents’ comfort or discomfort with mental health providers’ display of
religious symbols/items/phrases
122
References
ACLU v. Capitol Square Review and Advisory Board. 243 F.3d 289 (6th Circuit 2001).
Almeida, D.M., Stawski, R.S., & Cichy, K.E. (2010). Combining checklist and interview
strategies for assessing daily stressors: The daily inventory of stressful events. In
R. J. Contrada & A. Baum (Eds.), The handbook of stress science: Biology,
psychology, and health. New York, NY: Springer.
Barner-Barry, C. (2005). Contemporary Paganism: Minority religions in a majoritarian
America. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
Berger, H.A. (1999). A community of Witches: Contemporary Neo-Paganism and
Witchcraft in the United States. Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina
Press.
Brewer, M.B. (2001). The many faces of social identity: Implications for political
psychology. Political Psychology, 22, 115-125.
Church of Lukumi Babalu Aye v. Hiaheah. 508 U.S. 520 (1993).
Clark, M.A. (2007). Santería: Correcting the myths and uncovering the realities of a
growing religion. Westport, CT: Praeger.
Cookson, C. (1997). Reports from the trenches: A case study of religious freedom issues
faced by Wiccans practicing in the United States. Journal of Church and State,
39, 723-748.
Dana, R.H. (1993). Multicultural assessment perspectives for professional psychology.
Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
123
Doe v. Duncanville Independent School District. 70 F.3d 402 (5th Circuit 1995).
Duncan, J.R. (2003). Commentary: Privilege, invisibility, and religion: A critique of the
privilege that Christianity has enjoyed in the United States. Alabama Law Review,
54, 617-630.
Eddington, M. (2001, January 24). Salt Lake County brings back prayers. The Salt Lake
Tribune.
Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow. 542 U.S. 961 (2004).
Epstein, S.B. (1996). Rethinking the constitutionality of ceremonial deism. Columbia
Law Review, 96, 2083-2174.
Erdoes, R., & Ortiz, A. (1984). American Indian myths and legends. New York, NY:
Pantheon Books.
Fandrich, I.J. (2007). Yoruba influences on Haitian Vodou and New Orleans Voodoo.
Journal of Black Studies, 37(5), 775-791.
Folkman, S. & Lazarus, R. S. (1985). If it changes it must be a process: Study of emotion
and coping during three stages of a college examination. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 48, 150-170.
Gill, S. (1982). Native American religions: An introduction. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth
Publishing.
Gill, S. (1983). The religious life of man: Native American traditions. Belmont, CA:
Wadsworth Publishing.
Giddens, A. (1991). Modernity and self-identity: Self and society in the late modern age.
Cambridge: Polity.
124
Glucklich, A. (2001). Sacred pain: Hurting the body for the sake of the soul. New York,
NY: Oxford University Press.
Green, J.W. (1999). Cultural awareness in the human services: A multiethnic approach
(3rd edition). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Hammond, P.E. (1998). Liberty for all: Freedom of religion in the United States.
Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press.
Hays, P. (2001). Addressing cultural complexities in practice. Washington, DC:
American Psychological Association.
Henrikson, A. (2000, September 20). Cline’s office redesigns “God” sign. The Topeka
Capital-Journal.
Henrikson, A. (2000, December 13). Schmidt discusses lawsuit’s dismissal. The Topeka
Capital-Journal.
Hill, P.C., & Pargament, K.I. (2003). Advances in the conceptualization and
measurement of religion and spirituality: Implications for physical and mental
health research. American Psychologist, 58(1), 64-74.
Johnson, A.G. (2006). Privilege, power, and difference. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Lame Deer, J.F., & Erdoes, R. (1994). Lame Deer, seeker of visions. New York, NY:
Simon and Schuster.
Lazarus, R. S. (1999). Stress and emotion: A new synthesis. New York: Springer.
Martin, J.W. (1999). The land looks after us: A history of Native American religion. New
York, NY: Oxford University Press.
McGaa, E. (1990). Mother Earth spirituality: Native American paths to healing ourselves
and our world. New York, NY: Harper Collins.
125
Merry, S.E. (1992). Culture, power, and the discourse of law. New York Law School
Review, 37, 209-234.
Micas, S.L. (2002, September 12). Personal communication.
Moss, F., Edwards, E.D., Edwards, M.E., Janzen, F.V., & Howell, G. (1985). Sobriety
and American Indian problem drinkers. Alcoholism Treatment Quarterly, 2, 8196.
Murphy, J.M. (1994). Working the spirit: Ceremonies of the African Diaspora. Boston,
MA: Beacon Press.
Myerhoff, B.G. (1974). The sacred journey of the Huichol Indians. Ithaca, NY: Cornell
University Press.
National Alliance on Mental Illness. (2007). American Indian and Alaska Natives
communities mental health facts. [Brochure]. Arlington, VA: Author.
Post, R. (2003). Law and cultural conflict. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University
of California Berkeley School of Law, California.
Rasmussen, K. (2008). Eskimo folk-tales. Charleston, SC: Forgotten Books.
Reimer, C.S. (1999). Counseling the Inupiat Eskimo. Connecticut: Greenwood Press.
Reimer, C.S. (2002). What is the relationship between suicide, alcohol abuse, and
spirituality among the Inupiat? Unpublished manuscript.
Richardson, T. (2000, May 20). Cline’s “In God” posters drawing wrath of ACLU. The
Topeka Capital-Journal.
Richardson, T. (2000, May 25). ACLU to Cline: Take down posters or face court battle.
The Topeka Capital-Journal.
126
Ridington, R., & Ridington, T. (1971). Beaver dreaming and singing. Anthropologica, 13,
115-128.
Robinson, B.A. (2004, September 26). Wiccan beliefs. Religious Tolerance. Retrieved
May 18, 2009, from http://www.religioustolerance.org/wic_beli.htm
Robinson, B.A. (2009, April 22). Neopaganism: An introduction. Religious Tolerance.
Retrieved May 18, 2009, from http://www.religioustolerance.org/wic_intr.htm
Robinson, B.A. (2009, May 6). Wicca: Overview of practices, tools, rituals, etc.
Religious Tolerance. Retrieved May 18, 2009, from
http://www.religioustolerance.org/wic_prac.htm
Robinson, B.A. (2009, May 31). Native American spirituality. Religious Tolerance.
Retrieved September 3, 2010, from
http://www.religioustolerance.org/nataspir.htm
Robinson, B.A. (2010, February 7). Vodun and related religions. Religious Tolerance.
Retrieved September 3, 2010, from http://www.religioustolerance.org/voodoo.htm
Schmidt v. Cline. 171 F. Supp. 2d 1178 (N.D. Kansas 2001).
Sherry, S. (1998). Religion and the public square: Making democracy safe for religious
minorities. DePaul Law Review, 47, 499-512.
Simpson v. Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors. 546 U.S. 937 (2005).
Sigel, R. (2001). An introduction to the symposium of social identity. Political
Psychology, 22, 111-115.
Stack, A. (1983). A comparative analysis of suicide and religiosity. Journal of Social
Psychology, 199, 285-286.
127
Starhawk. (1987). Truth or dare: Encounters with power, authority, and mystery. New
York, NY: Harper Collins.
Struthers, R. (2001). Conducting sacred research: An indigenous experience. Wicazo Sa
Review, 2, 125-133.
Twofeathers, M. (1994). The road to the Sundance. New York, NY: Hyperion.
United States Constitution, Amendment 1, Establishment Clause.
Warren, C.G. (2003). No need to stand on ceremony: The corruptive influence of
ceremonial deism and the need for a separationist reconfiguration of the Supreme
Court’s Establishment Clause jurisprudence. Mercer Law Review, 54, 1669-1718.
Watters, E. (2010). Crazy like us. New York, NY: Free Press.
Wildman, S.M., & Davis, A.D. (1995). Language and silence: Making systems of
privilege visible. Santa Clara Law Review, 35, 881-892.
Wynne v. Great Falls, 2003. 376 F.3d 292 (4th Circuit, 2004).
Yardley, M. (2008). Social work practice with Pagans, Witches, and Wiccans: Guidelines
for practice with children and youths. Social Work, 53(4), 329-336.
York, M. (2003) Pagan theology: Paganism as a world religion. New York, NY:
University Press.
Young, B.W., & Fowler, M.L. (2000). Cahokia: The great Native American metropolis.
Champaign, IL: University of Illinois Press.
Zautra, A. J. (2003). Emotions, stress, and health. New York, NY: Oxford University
Press.
Zimmerman, L.J., & Molyneaux, B.L. (2000). Native North America. Norman, OK:
University of Oklahoma Press.
128